Joerg Schilling wrote:
Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong... the 3K manual page archive for developers
has nothing todo with Solaris install... right ?
(And bzip2 on SPARC could be tweaked to run a little bit faster anyway).
I vote to use bzip2 to compress all
Hi Dennis,
I like really this, you rock. I should know the answer, but I honestly need to
dbl-check as you are the first to republish. Thank you, because this makes all
the work worth it, to see the pages out there in a new way immediately.
Regards,
Michelle
This message posted from
Hi Rich,
Thanks for this message, really good to hear from you. I will ask the
gatekeeper to make this change if there are more folks who prefer gzip to
bzip2--you are the first to ask.
Regards,
MIchelle
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Hi Joerg,
Just talked to Bonnie, this was an oversight. We are still working on the list
of SCCS related man pages, so they missed this drop. Thanks for asking about
these, I appreciate your help to make sure the pages you need are made
available.
Regards,
Michelle
This message posted
On 1/29/07, Michelle Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rich,
Thanks for this message, really good to hear from you. I will ask the
gatekeeper to make this change if there are more folks who prefer gzip to
bzip2--you are the first to ask.
I think it's better to stick with bzip2 archives.
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Bruno Jargot wrote:
I think it's better to stick with bzip2 archives. They need less
bandwidth and less room on disks. Using gzip again would be a step
backwards. Really.
I resepctfully disagree. Casper and I discussed this ages ago (I
forget exactly when); apparently
Rich Teer wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Bruno Jargot wrote:
I think it's better to stick with bzip2 archives. They need less
bandwidth and less room on disks. Using gzip again would be a step
backwards. Really.
I resepctfully disagree. Casper and I discussed this ages ago (I
forget
On 1/29/07, Bruno Jargot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/29/07, Michelle Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rich,
Thanks for this message, really good to hear from you. I will ask the
gatekeeper to make this change if there are more folks who prefer gzip to
bzip2--you are the first to ask.
I
Rich Teer wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Bruno Jargot wrote:
I think it's better to stick with bzip2 archives. They need less
bandwidth and less room on disks. Using gzip again would be a step
backwards. Really.
I resepctfully disagree. Casper and I discussed this ages ago (I
forget
Eric Enright wrote:
Given the option, I'll take gzip over bzip2 without consideration.
Waiting a little extra time to receive the archive is far better than
waiting a lot of extra time to unpack it.
Exactly.
Only issue with the gzip binary shipping with Sun Solaris (10 03/05 and
earlier
Martin Bochnig wrote:
Rich Teer wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Bruno Jargot wrote:
I think it's better to stick with bzip2 archives. They need less
bandwidth and less room on disks. Using gzip again would be a step
backwards. Really.
I resepctfully disagree. Casper and I discussed this
Roland Mainz wrote:
I vote to use bzip2 to compress all the developer sources... usually the
disks are slower than uncompressing the tarball anyway...
Not if the uncompressed archives are bigger than, say, 100MB.
Try it out on a U60 with 1x300MHz and let's see if your opinion has changed.
Eric Enright wrote:
On 1/29/07, Bruno Jargot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/29/07, Michelle Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rich,
[snip]
Waiting a little extra time to receive the archive is far better than
waiting a lot of extra time to unpack it.
Offtopic: Both gzip and bzip2 run much
Martin Bochnig wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
I vote to use bzip2 to compress all the developer sources... usually the
disks are slower than uncompressing the tarball anyway...
Not if the uncompressed archives are bigger than, say, 100MB.
Try it out on a U60 with 1x300MHz and let's see if your
Michelle Olson wrote:
Thanks for this message, really good to hear from you.
I will ask the gatekeeper to make this change if there
are more folks who prefer gzip to bzip2--you are the first to ask.
What about providing both gzip and bzip2 tarballs ?
Bye,
Roland
P.S.: Would it be
Stephen Lau wrote:
Michelle Olson wrote:
Thanks for this message, really good to hear from you.
I will ask the gatekeeper to make this change if there
are more folks who prefer gzip to bzip2--you are the
first to ask.
My personal preference is for bzip2 - but that's just cause I
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Roland Mainz wrote:
I resepctfully disagree. Casper and I discussed this ages ago (I
forget exactly when); apparently the use of bzip archives is one
reasons why installing Solaris takes so long.
Correct me if I am wrong... the 3K manual page archive for developers
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Eric Enright wrote:
Given the option, I'll take gzip over bzip2 without consideration.
Waiting a little extra time to receive the archive is far better than
waiting a lot of extra time to unpack it.
Amen to that (and I have a reasonably fast 2.6 GHz Opteron CPU here)!
--
On 1/29/07, Martin Bochnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eric Enright wrote:
Given the option, I'll take gzip over bzip2 without consideration.
Waiting a little extra time to receive the archive is far better than
waiting a lot of extra time to unpack it.
Exactly.
Only issue with the gzip
On 1/29/07, Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michelle Olson wrote:
Thanks for this message, really good to hear from you.
I will ask the gatekeeper to make this change if there
are more folks who prefer gzip to bzip2--you are the first to ask.
What about providing both gzip and bzip2
Eric Enright wrote:
On 1/29/07, Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michelle Olson wrote:
Thanks for this message, really good to hear from you.
I will ask the gatekeeper to make this change if there
are more folks who prefer gzip to bzip2--you are the first to ask.
What about
On 1/29/07, Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eric Enright wrote:
On 1/29/07, Bruno Jargot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/29/07, Michelle Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rich,
[snip]
Waiting a little extra time to receive the archive is far better than
waiting a lot of extra time to
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Bruno Jargot wrote:
I think it's better to stick with bzip2 archives. They need less
bandwidth and less room on disks. Using gzip again would be a step
backwards. Really.
I resepctfully disagree. Casper and I discussed this ages ago (I
forget exactly when); apparently
Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong... the 3K manual page archive for developers
has nothing todo with Solaris install... right ?
(And bzip2 on SPARC could be tweaked to run a little bit faster anyway).
I vote to use bzip2 to compress all the developer sources...
Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michelle Olson wrote:
Thanks for this message, really good to hear from you.
I will ask the gatekeeper to make this change if there
are more folks who prefer gzip to bzip2--you are the first to ask.
What about providing both gzip and bzip2 tarballs ?
Eric Enright wrote:
Given the option, I'll take gzip over bzip2 without consideration.
Waiting a little extra time to receive the archive is far better than
waiting a lot of extra time to unpack it.
Exactly.
Only issue with the gzip binary shipping with Sun Solaris (10 03/05 and
earlier
26 matches
Mail list logo
