On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Sedat Dilek <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:07 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi!
>>> why do you name your BZ2-tarballs with the right and common
>>> file-extensions ".tar.bz2"?
>>
>> That is something that just has been this way longer than anybody could
>> remeber. I guess we can change it to tar.bz2 for next releases.
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> ...and switch to tar.xz as well :-)?
>
> Some words to my statistics...
> I did not use -9 (optimal compression) for both repacked tarballs.
> xz uses "-6" as default for compression-level according to its man-page.
> Unfortunately, bzip2 man-page reveals not much.

$ file ltp-full-20130109.tar.bz2
ltp-full-20130109.tar.bz2: bzip2 compressed data, block size = 900k

So, file tells us "-9" :-).

- Sedat -

> FYI: The xz man-page has a nice section about compression-level in
> combination with memory and cpu usage.
>
> Thorsten Glaser (a friend of mine) has reflected critically about the
> usage of xz (especially using high values for compression) and also
> compared with bzip2/gzip in his blog [1].
> Worth reading!
> Yes, bzip2 is no more modern - don't use it anymore.
> Save disc-space - save the planet :-)!
>
> Have fun!
>
> - Sedat -
>
> [1] 
> https://www.mirbsd.org/permalinks/wlog-10_e20130104-tg.htm#e20130104-tg_wlog-10
>
>> --
>> Cyril Hrubis
>> [email protected]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery
and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow -
200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts.
SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612 
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Reply via email to