On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Michael Schuster <Michael.Schuster at sun.com> wrote: > Ben Taylor wrote: > >>> 3a. using 'tar xzf pkg.tar.gz' is about 30% faster than 'gunzip >>> pkg.tar.gz && tar xf pkg.tar'. Changing this would benefit everyone. >> >> you've tested this? There's probably no harm in doing this, though >> we have to handle this differently for bz2 version. (Though adding >> bzip2 support to gtar if it isn't already there would not be difficult. >> I added it to compress years ago to support bzip2 flar archives >> since changing the lib stuff for flar installs was much too complicated) > > how about "<uncompression tool> -c pkg.tar.<suffix> | tar xf > pkg" or > something like that? how does that compare to the other two variants? if > favourable, one could use that and save people the effort of adapting > gtar...
Since I was bringing up the point of streamlining "development", I think Pavel's point was that we save 30% by not piping for tgz files. Obviously, the infrastructure already supports all this transparently, and a little time is necessary to make the selective change to improve .tgz decompresses. > >>> 4. regarding the remark about limitations, I don't think it's a real >>> problem, we're already limiting ourselves much more in the choice of >>> compiler and other things. It's reasonable to expect people running >>> osol and S10u8 to use ZFS. >> >> yes. obviously, I would not implement this as the default, since some >> folks on S10 might be using ufs, or other file systems. > > lets not forget that while not the default, ufs still works fine on > OpenSolaris too :-) lol. yes. I wonder if there have been many ufs bugs opened from an open solaris system. Ben
