Re: ideas 3

["Martin P. Hellwig" <mhellwig@xxxxxxxxx>]

Matthew Dillon wrote:
> :>     Well, I dunno.  bzip2 is now fairly ubiquitous in the world of UNIX,
> :>     and it does produce ~17% better compressed ISOs.  While I don't think
> :>     it is a good general choice due to its lack of flexibility in cpu
> :>     consumption (1), it may be a good choice for ISO distribution.  bzip2 -9
> :>     produces a 70MB file while gzip -9 produces an 82MB file.
> :
> :
> :With 7z i get a 49 MB file instead of the 79 MB with gzip.
> :See archivers/p7zip and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7z
> :
> :http://a.ftp.fortunaty.net/DragonFly/iso-images/dfly-1.0A_REL.iso.7z
> :
> :Andy
>  
>      I looked at it, but I don't think we are going to use it.  It looks
>      like a mess of different algorithms and I don't trust that the long
>      term (30 year horizon) stability and compatibility will be there.

Personally I favour bzip2, merely because of its license.
Me judges that the cpu consumption will eventually be less of a problem 
in 30 years then the GPL license. I am not against GPL, just pro bsd, 
which makes my life simpler.

--
mph