Re: [PATCH 2/2] Disable lzo compression, lzma is doing its job just fine

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 06:24:14PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 1:40 AM, Pavel Roskin<proski@gnu.org> wrote:
> > ChangeLog:
> >
> >        * Makefile.in: Remove LIBLZO and enable_lzo.
> >        * conf/i386-pc.rmk: Remove lzo support.
> >        * configure.ac: Remove checks for lzo, don't define ENABLE_LZMA.
> >        * include/grub/i386/pc/kernel.h: Define ENABLE_LZMA.  Remove lzo
> >        support.
> >        * kern/i386/pc/lzo1x.S: Remove.
> >        * kern/i386/pc/startup.S: Remove lzo support.
> >        * util/i386/pc/grub-mkimage.c: Likewise.
> Is there a reason to remove lzo? I know that lzma performs much better
> in terms of compression but afaik lzo doesn't create any problems nor
> is compiled by default

It doesn't break things, since it's barely modified, and doesn't interact with
the rest of the code, but simply having more code means an added work to
maintain it when we restructure things, etc.  It needs to pay off in some way.

> and may be desirable for some users

Can you give an example?

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."