On 2017-01-15 21:56, Christian Lamparter wrote:
On Sunday, January 15, 2017 9:25:28 PM CET Daniel Engberg wrote:
Thanks for submitting a patch but can you please outline why we would
want to switch from a tarball release to a git repo pull for iperf3?
Actually, it's in the commit. It saves a couple of KiB since we can
switch to
xz along the way too. As for iperf 3.1.5 this is:
550862 Bytes for iperf-3.1.5.tar.gz
vs.
400468 Bytes for
iperf-3.1.5-a46d5aec9726e196e86ab192c3f77dea6a3beb8e.tar.xz
That's around 27% savings of bandwidth. Because once it's uploaded
onto the mirror
the download methods will pick it from there - instead of the listed
address.
Anyway, if you have your own idea of how to do it: Then just make a
patch as well.
Regards,
Christian
I'm all for saving space and bandwidth but as far as I know the common
practice is to use tarballs where it makes sense (ie pretty much
everywhere) and upstream download mirrors/sites. Directing all users to
the LEDE "backup" mirror is not a desirable outcome as there's no
official xz package. That's just my point of view.
Regards,
Daniel Engberg
_______________________________________________
Lede-dev mailing list
Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
