On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Theo de Raadt <[email protected]> wrote:
[re Has anyone looked at zopfli]
> If we did add it, it would only benefit the fast architectures, since
> the others cannot afford the additional build time. Developers would
> use up the space gains quickly. Right now a few architectures are
> neck and neck regarding which install media are close to full. Older
> architectures would hit full install media issues first. A smaller
> contingent of developers who take care of those architectures would
> have to deal with the fallout, creating further "friction"...
For comparison, on the slowest machine I currently have access to (a
500MHz ALIX) zopfli on the fastest setting (--i1) is 14.2 times slower
than gzip -9 (192 seconds vs 13.5) for the same kernel and produces
output that's 35702 bytes smaller.
Anyway, I'm not the one who has to deal with this either way so I'll
leave it there.
--
Darren Tucker (dtucker at zip.com.au)
GPG key 8FF4FA69 / D9A3 86E9 7EEE AF4B B2D4 37C9 C982 80C7 8FF4 FA69
Good judgement comes with experience. Unfortunately, the experience
usually comes from bad judgement.
