From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1K8EQI-0006Gl-J9 for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:07:02 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K8EQG-0006Fd-Lw for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:07:00 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K8EQE-0006Ex-GR for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:07:00 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36260 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K8EQE-0006Em-6P for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:06:58 -0400 Received: from c60.cesmail.net ([216.154.195.49]:8695) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K8EQD-0001vn-R8 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:06:57 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO relay.cesmail.net) ([192.168.1.81]) by c60.cesmail.net with ESMTP; 16 Jun 2008 09:06:55 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.21] (static-72-92-88-10.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [72.92.88.10]) by relay.cesmail.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CFC4619058 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:06:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Pavel Roskin To: The development of GRUB 2 In-Reply-To: <1213618146.6330.6.camel@localhost> References: <20080615174819.GA3506@thorin> <1213576320.12833.3.camel@dv> <20080616091535.GA17206@thorin> <1213615227.6330.3.camel@localhost> <1213618146.6330.6.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 09:06:54 -0400 Message-Id: <1213621614.11521.16.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.2 (2.22.2-2.fc9) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Subject: Re: [RFC] split floppy support off biosdisk X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 13:07:00 -0000 On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 14:09 +0200, Javier Martín wrote: > El lun, 16-06-2008 a las 19:47 +0800, Bean escribió: > > Well, I did some testing a while ago, the result is in: > > > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2007-12/msg00114.html > > > > Even with lzo compressed image core.img, lzma can save up to 5K. > > > You mean that even with an already compressed LZO image, LZMA can > further compress it another 5 KB? No, it was uncompressed. GRUB 0.97 doesn't use LZO compression. Anyway, we need to check savings on the GRUB 2 core image, which is much shorter than stage2, and factor out the decompressor size. My gut feeling is that block sorting algorithms like lzma and bzip2 would be an overkill, and even switching to gzip would be only marginally useful. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin