I'm presuming that the FC RPMs are compressed (as 'A' the full install
size is larger than the ISOs and 'B' the ISOs don't compress very
well). I remember reading a discussion (not sure if it was RH) about
how it was preferable to use gzip over bzip2 as gzip is faster. I'm
wondering are we still using gzip and are reasons over bzip2 still
relevant? Now that the distribution has hit a fourth CD (although it
could still be 3 if we used 700MB CDs) is this up for discussion? For
people downloading on dialup or pay per megabyte, it doesn't matter if
it takes a little longer on install (not so important with current
processors) because we've saved more time (or money) during the download
and it would lessen the load on the mirrors. I'd be interested in
looking into the size gains of using bzip2 if someone would explain how
to rebuild the rpms. Interestingly 7-zip kills bzip2 on compression
size and decompression speed (http://reviews.geekhaven.net/compression/)
and there is a Linux port (http://sourceforge.net/projects/p7zip/), but
it's early days yet.
Speaking of early days, I see that reizer 4 filesystem is about to be
released. I'm wondering if there is any discussion as to whether FC is
intending to adopt it in preference to ext3 or have the option on install?
Is loop-AES working in FC2?
Are FC web graphics available for linking purposes? Like 'Powered by
Fedora'? I'm looking for size 88x31.
Cheers.
