public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Joel Becker <Joel.Becker@oracle.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.33-rc7
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 19:28:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100208182816.GD1469@ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1002071029040.3829@localhost.localdomain>

Hi!

> > 	When I grab tarballs, I only grab .gz.  Bandwidth isn't a
> > problem (3 minutes versus four on my DSL, I still switch over to another
> > screen and check back).  But .bz2 unpacks very slowly in the
> > environments I'm usually grabbing a tarball for.  I save more time
> > unpacking .gz than I do downloading .bz2.
> 
> Ok, there seems to be a fair number of people who prefer .gz files for 
> whatever reason. 
> 
> So I guess I'll stay with the current setup. It's only (somebody elses) 
> diskspace, after all.
> 
> Another option might be to stop generating the .bz2 files, of
 > course. 

It would be good to keep ketchup working.

> Anybody who cares more about network bandwidth than CPU use (ie people who 
> would seem to prefer bz2) would be better off using git instead, which 
> packs things _way_ better, by virtue of being much more incremental.

Well, yes, but git did really badly on arm/128MB machine when I
tried. What would be *really* nice... could we get -rc-s relative to
each other?

That would help a lot. Of course, git wins when you only produce diffs
against .X release, but... That would be 80% bandwidth saving against
current situation and still cpu-friendly.

									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-02-08 18:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-06 22:44 Linux 2.6.33-rc7 Linus Torvalds
2010-02-06 22:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-06 23:00   ` John Kacur
2010-02-06 23:06   ` Justin P. Mattock
2010-02-07  4:54   ` Mark Lord
2010-02-07  4:58     ` Kyle McMartin
2010-02-07  5:11       ` Mark Lord
2010-02-07  5:09     ` Justin P. Mattock
2010-02-07 10:39       ` John Feuerstein
2010-02-07 19:10     ` James Cloos
2010-02-08  3:27       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-07 10:20   ` Joel Becker
2010-02-07 10:43     ` Justin P. Mattock
2010-02-07 18:32     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-07 18:39       ` Joerg Roedel
2010-02-08 18:28       ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2010-02-08 21:49         ` Jiri Slaby
2010-02-10  8:14           ` Pavel Machek
2010-02-08  3:26   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-09 11:30   ` Pádraig Brady

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100208182816.GD1469@ucw.cz \
    --to=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=Joel.Becker@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox