On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 13:54 +0100, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote: > On Sonntag, 27. Januar 2008, Justin wrote: > > Thats a good point. Now it worked really fast. > > But then the questions is why should I use pbzip2 for decompression with > > portage? I think most tarballs are packed only with the normal > > compression algorithm! > > The WIKI articel pretends a gain of speed which wont be! > > and that is why you should never trust wiki-articles. Everybody can write > them > and say whatever they want.
Well, many eyes see much. It's all a matter of checking, just as with open source software... To the topic: I've unmerged pbzip2 after reading its docs. ... seemed too much trouble. I'll try it again when it is suitable as a drop-in replacement or when portage can make use of it. In the mean time, if I need good compression with more than one thread, I use p7zip's lzma implementation. By the way, as soon as I come into contact with some decent scripting languages (and no longer this closed source LabVIEW I currently have to work with), I'll try to build a wrapper around p7zip to create a drop-in replacement for gzip, bzip2 and zip.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
