Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 02 Oct 2006 11:16:45 -0400 | From | Phillip Susi <> | Subject | Re: Smaller compressed kernel source tarballs? |
| |
David Lang wrote: > I just had what's probably a silly thought. > > as an alturnative to useing tar, what about useing a git pack? > > create a git archive with no history, just the current files, and then > pack it with agressive delta options. >
Isn't that what a patch.gz is? Diff generates the deltas and then they are compressed. Can't get much simpler or better than that.
> since git uses compression on the result anyway it's unlikly to be much > worse then a tarball, and since it can use deltas across files it may > even be better (potentially enough better to cover the cost of > downloading the git binaries) > > this would be especially effective once git adds a 'shallow clone' > capability to then take the snapshot pack and extend it (either forward > or backward as requested by the user), but may be worth doing even > without this. > > thoughts? > > David Lang
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |