lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [kernel.org users] XZ Migration discussion


On Fri, 12 Feb 2010, Jean Delvare wrote:
>
> Maybe that's just me, but my main concern is neither download times nor
> decompression times. My main concern is the access time to directory
> indexes when browsing the kernel archive, because there are 5 entries
> for every patch or tarball: .bz2, .bz2.sign, .gz, .gz.sign and .sign.
> This is horribly slow.

This was actually the main reason for me personally to ask about just
dropping support for .gz files - not because I care deeply about how much
disk space kernel.org wastes, but because the long directory listings make
it slower for me to mentally index the directory.

> 1* Keep a single compression format. This saves almost 40% of the
> files.
>
> 2* Move one of the compression formats somewhere else, so that it
> doesn't get in the way but is still available if needed.
>
> 3* Create a new subdirectory for every 2.6.x kernel, and move all the
> related files there.

I did 3* for the testing kernels (exactly because the directory listing
got to be unreadable), and you just complained about it ;)

Of course, your complaint was that the subdirectory wasn't done
immediately, and that the old files get moved to their own subdirectory
later as a "archival" thing.

I just didn't want to change the location for the latest kernel.

> 4* Get rid of the LATEST-IS-* files. This is a small count, won't save
> much, but these files seem totally useless to me these days.

Yeah, they also end up continually being stale.

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-02-12 16:29    [W:1.176 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site