On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 05:12:15PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
We are building a binary distribution which main characteristic is to have
the
packages built _rarely_. As such, a useful but CPU-expensive operation is
always worth it.
The situation is slightly different for
Le jeudi, 30 août 2012 14.46:33, Jon Dowland a écrit :
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 05:12:15PM +0200, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
We are building a binary distribution which main characteristic is to
have the packages built _rarely_. As such, a useful but CPU-expensive
operation is always worth
Hi!
On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 12:10:18 +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
In DebConf12, I talked about xz compression for Debian packages(*).
Now I'll talk about next step, suggestion for use xz with with result
from some experiment.
On Aug 29, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
I thought this was already the consensus, and the only dissenting
opinion was that the base system should still be using gzip so that
foreign non-Debian systems can unpack it w/o requiring to build or
install xz beforehand.
I am not sure if
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:56:47PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Before wondering whether PNG files should have an additional
compression level, is there any reason why a better PNG compression
isn't used in the first place? For instance, optipng -o9 tries
various parameters and keeps the best
On 29/08/12 15:01, Jon Dowland wrote:
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:56:47PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Before wondering whether PNG files should have an additional
compression level, is there any reason why a better PNG compression
isn't used in the first place? For instance, optipng -o9 tries
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 03:17:15PM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
I don't think it's worth +dfsg, and CPU cycles will only be wasted once
on the maintainer side, since most of PNGs are in arch:all packages anyway.
I used to hack on the games-thumbnails package a bit, which ran optipng as part
Le mercredi, 29 août 2012 16.01:43, Jon Dowland a écrit :
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:56:47PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Before wondering whether PNG files should have an additional
compression level, is there any reason why a better PNG compression
isn't used in the first place? For
Marco wrote:
On Aug 29, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
I thought this was already the consensus, and the only dissenting
opinion was that the base system should still be using gzip so that
foreign non-Debian systems can unpack it w/o requiring to build or
install xz beforehand.
I am
Steve McIntyre wrote:
People have worried about it, but I think the consensus from DebConf
is that we don't want to be hampered in our own development by
considering external users
How are external users different from users?
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:11:02PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Steve McIntyre wrote:
People have worried about it, but I think the consensus from DebConf
is that we don't want to be hampered in our own development by
considering external users
How are external users different from users?
Sorry,
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:10:18PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
In DebConf12, I talked about xz compression for Debian packages(*).
Now I'll talk about next step, suggestion for use xz with with result
from some experiment.
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:10:18PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
We know some packages are better to use gzip, but it's an exception. Using xz
is best choice for rest 99.99% of packages. We can deal with such exception
by specifying gzip for that (e.g. openclipart-png).
Or even no compression
On 2012-08-28 12:05:26 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:10:18PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
We know some packages are better to use gzip, but it's an
exception. Using xz is best choice for rest 99.99% of packages.
We can deal with such exception by specifying gzip
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:10:18PM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
--
conclusion (rest)
--
I recommend to use xz ***by default*** (with
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:56:47PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Before wondering whether PNG files should have an additional
compression level, is there any reason why a better PNG compression
isn't used in the first place? For instance, optipng -o9 tries
various parameters and keeps the best
16 matches
Mail list logo
