On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 06:59:42AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > (I have not really been building current so am unclear on the xz > details.) > > I'd like us to keep somewhat separate the notions of: > > someone is doing build.sh release > > someone wants min-size sets at the expense of a lot of cpu time
I agree, modulo s/release/sets/, especially when we're doing things like "reproducible builds" or "make images suitable for giving others". Very different use cases. When I'm developing (and/or trying to verify if the build works), I don't care that the tgz sets are 1.9x the size of the xz ones [mostly due to comp and base, if you're curious]; if I'm trying to send them across the net, I do. The big issue I run into is that `build.sh sets` - which you much need for most kinds of consistent installation - takes quite a bit longer and much more CPU with xz as compared to pigz. The results from doing `build.sh -x sets` in my VM, with the only change being USE_PIGZGZIP=1 in /etc/mk.conf, are USE_PIGZGZIP=1 216s user 38s system 80s wallclock (commented out) 536s user 77s system 279s wallclock and this is on a relatively modern machine's VM with a fast SSD; the difference gets greatly amplified on my anemic real-hardware server boxes.