Rick Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Jan 2, 2008, at 9:47 PM, Colin Watson wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 06:38:37PM -0500, Rick Thomas wrote: >>> On Jan 2, 2008, at 12:03 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>>>> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 12:38:51PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote: >>>>>> Personally, I'd like to know what is the increase on space and >>>>>> memory for adding bzcat on busybox-udeb. However, as said in >>>>>> another mail, I see no point to support different set of features >>>>>> on installed and d-i environments (from debootstrap POV). >>> >>> It could actually improve the space situation in the installer if it >>> allowed some packages to be compressed smaller than their present >>> size. >> >> The worst (and most relevant here) constraint is on initrd size, and >> that is unaffected by .deb size. > > Good point. Along those lines, another constraint that's important > is the RAM footprint of the installer -- for small memory machines > (same audience as for small initrd size). How much does adding bzcat > to busybox increase it's RAM footprint when executing?
If people wants, I can produce two installer mini.isos and test it. -- O T A V I O S A L V A D O R --------------------------------------------- E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br --------------------------------------------- "Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]