On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, Willy Tarreau wrote:
A lot of improvement can be made in tar to compress better archive with
large number of small files such as the kernel. You just have to see the
difference in archive size depending on the base directory name. If you
come up with something really interesting which does not alter the output
format nor the compression time, it might get a place in the git-tar-tree
command. But IMHO, it would me more interesting to further reduce patches
size than tarballs size, since patches might be downloaded far more often.
I just had what's probably a silly thought.
as an alturnative to useing tar, what about useing a git pack?
create a git archive with no history, just the current files, and then pack it
with agressive delta options.
since git uses compression on the result anyway it's unlikly to be much worse
then a tarball, and since it can use deltas across files it may even be better
(potentially enough better to cover the cost of downloading the git binaries)
this would be especially effective once git adds a 'shallow clone' capability to
then take the snapshot pack and extend it (either forward or backward as
requested by the user), but may be worth doing even without this.
thoughts?
David Lang
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
