On 01/17/2017 12:26 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
[sent off list to reduce amount of spam]
Please cease this off-topic. It has nothing to do with the subject
debated. If you want to talk over a beer, then please go to a pub. If
you want to compare your pe^w^w^w embedded systems, then please
find an ap
On 01/17/2017 01:05 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
On 01/13/2017 08:06 AM, james wrote:
On 01/13/2017 02:45 AM, Sven Eden wrote:
Btw.: Even "embedded experts" wholeheartedly agree that they disagree
what
"embedded" actually is. But I do think SoCs actually *do* qualify, at
least to
some degree...
On 16-01-2017 22:13:39 -0800, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 05:16 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 09-01-2017 09:08:22 +0100, Jan Stary wrote:
> >> The particular problem I am having is that http://mdocml.bsd.lv/ ,
> >> my manpage formatter of choice, does deliberately not support bzip
> >
On 01/10/2017 05:16 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 09-01-2017 09:08:22 +0100, Jan Stary wrote:
>> The particular problem I am having is that http://mdocml.bsd.lv/ ,
>> my manpage formatter of choice, does deliberately not support bzip
>> (or any other outside decompressors for that matter).
>
> At
On 01/13/2017 08:06 AM, james wrote:
> On 01/13/2017 02:45 AM, Sven Eden wrote:
>
>> Btw.: Even "embedded experts" wholeheartedly agree that they disagree
>> what
>> "embedded" actually is. But I do think SoCs actually *do* qualify, at
>> least to
>> some degree...
>
>
> Huh?
>
> Probably who y
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:06:47 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> > the manpage formatter needs to call
> > external unpackers. All this to save 40M. I honestly don't think
> > it's worth it.
>
> Calling external tools in a pipeline is a pretty normal solution
> in the *nix world. It could be even cons
On Jan 10 14:16:47, grob...@gentoo.org wrote:
> On 09-01-2017 09:08:22 +0100, Jan Stary wrote:
> > The particular problem I am having is that http://mdocml.bsd.lv/ ,
> > my manpage formatter of choice, does deliberately not support bzip
> > (or any other outside decompressors for that matter).
>
>
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:05:58 +0100
Jan Stary wrote:
> I am not really familiar eith this system - what would be
> the right piece of information that does relate tot this?
Nothing really, because Gentoo doesn't have "a version", its a rolling release
model.
The closest approximation would be th
On 01/13/2017 02:45 AM, Sven Eden wrote:
Btw.: Even "embedded experts" wholeheartedly agree that they disagree what
"embedded" actually is. But I do think SoCs actually *do* qualify, at least to
some degree...
Huh?
Probably who you deem as an expert; they have not clearly defined
systems ty
Am Donnerstag, 12. Januar 2017, 19:08:05 CET schrieb Walter Dnes:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 05:15:25PM +0100, Jan Stary wrote
>
> > On Jan 11 13:34:09, sven.e...@gmx.de wrote:
> > > Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2017, 13:36:15 CET schrieb Jan Stary:
> > > > > You arguing that 40MB is nothing on modern s
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 05:15:25PM +0100, Jan Stary wrote
> On Jan 11 13:34:09, sven.e...@gmx.de wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2017, 13:36:15 CET schrieb Jan Stary:
> > > > You arguing that 40MB is nothing on modern systems (which, by the way is
> > > > not exactly true, talking about embedded
On Jan 11 13:34:09, sven.e...@gmx.de wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2017, 13:36:15 CET schrieb Jan Stary:
> > > You arguing that 40MB is nothing on modern systems (which, by the way is
> > > not exactly true, talking about embedded ones).
> >
> > Can you gove an example of an embedded system wit
On 01/10/2017 06:54 AM, Jan Stary wrote:
>
> These are workarounds. Let me get back to the original question:
> would you please consider having _uncompressed_ manpages as the default?
>
> On this particular system, the bzipped /usr/share/man/ is 67M.
> The uncompressed man/ is 108M. That's 40M s
Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2017, 13:36:15 CET schrieb Jan Stary:
> > You arguing that 40MB is nothing on modern systems (which, by the way is
> > not exactly true, talking about embedded ones).
>
> Can you gove an example of an embedded system with manpages?
My Raspberry Pi 3. ;-)
Cheers
Sven
si
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:01:15 +0200
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> Ühel kenal päeval, T, 10.01.2017 kell 19:19, kirjutas Vadim A. Misbakh-
> Soloviov:
> > that will
> > affect tons of users (which are happy with current "defaults")
> > because yours
> > only own local problems (not having root access on
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 12:54:21 +0100
Jan Stary wrote:
> On Jan 09 09:30:11, ike...@gentoo.org wrote:
> > Hiya Jan,
> >
> > The following snippet from Ingo is correct:
> >
> > > So, you want to hear something constructive? Your best option is to
> > > just decompress that stuff on your system.
Ühel kenal päeval, T, 10.01.2017 kell 14:39, kirjutas Ulrich Mueller:
> > > > > > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> > Yes, the default should be changed for everyone.
> > To PORTAGE_COMPRESS="xz".
>
> Back in 2013, vapier had made extensive studies of compression tools
> for man pages an
> On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> Yes, the default should be changed for everyone.
> To PORTAGE_COMPRESS="xz".
Back in 2013, vapier had made extensive studies of compression tools
for man pages and documentation, and the conclusion was that bzip2
gives the best overall compression
On 09-01-2017 09:08:22 +0100, Jan Stary wrote:
> The particular problem I am having is that http://mdocml.bsd.lv/ ,
> my manpage formatter of choice, does deliberately not support bzip
> (or any other outside decompressors for that matter).
Attached patch works for me. XZ should be a similar exer
Ühel kenal päeval, T, 10.01.2017 kell 19:19, kirjutas Vadim A. Misbakh-
Soloviov:
> that will
> affect tons of users (which are happy with current "defaults")
> because yours
> only own local problems (not having root access on the system)?
Yes, the default should be changed for everyone.
To POR
On Jan 10 19:19:03, gen...@mva.name wrote:
> В письме от вторник, 10 января 2017 г. 13:08:14 +07 пользователь Jan Stary
> написал:
> > On Jan 10 19:04:47, gen...@mva.name wrote:
> > > > There is an option to support; the packages need to be reinstalled
> > > > or there are untracked files; the man
В письме от вторник, 10 января 2017 г. 13:08:14 +07 пользователь Jan Stary
написал:
> On Jan 10 19:04:47, gen...@mva.name wrote:
> > > There is an option to support; the packages need to be reinstalled
> > > or there are untracked files; the manpage formatter needs to call
> > > external unpackers
On Jan 10 19:04:47, gen...@mva.name wrote:
> > There is an option to support; the packages need to be reinstalled
> > or there are untracked files; the manpage formatter needs to call
> > external unpackers. All this to save 40M. I honestly don't think
> > it's worth it.
>
> Why do you care about
> > This is Gentoo 2.2 (4.4.6-gentoo x86_64).
>
> That doesn't actually tell any Gentoo user anything about your system
> except a very specific few bits of data which do not relate at all to
> the rest of the subject matter of your e-mail.
I am not really familiar eith this system - what would b
> There is an option to support; the packages need to be reinstalled
> or there are untracked files; the manpage formatter needs to call
> external unpackers. All this to save 40M. I honestly don't think
> it's worth it.
Why do you care about calling external unpacker, but do not care about saving
On Jan 10 12:54:21, h...@stare.cz wrote:
> Also, the uncompressed manpage will not get updated
> when the packages gets updated. I will have two copies,
> a stale *.1 and an up-to-date *.1.bz2.
And things like /usr/share/man/man1/sx.1.bz2
will not get unbzipped, because it's a symlink, now broken.
On Jan 09 09:30:11, ike...@gentoo.org wrote:
> Hiya Jan,
>
> The following snippet from Ingo is correct:
>
> > So, you want to hear something constructive? Your best option is to
> > just decompress that stuff on your system. (Gentoo is famous for
> > its excessive configurability - maybe there
On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 09:08:22 +0100
Jan Stary wrote:
> This is Gentoo 2.2 (4.4.6-gentoo x86_64).
That doesn't actually tell any Gentoo user anything about your system
except a very specific few bits of data which do not relate at all to
the rest of the subject matter of your e-mail.
Kind regards
On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 09:30:11 +
Mike Auty wrote:
> As mentioned in [2,3,others]. You'll then need to reinstall all
> packages.
Well, most. Probably a subset of "all", and if anything gets stuck half way,
you'll
want to know which remaining packages need merged.
find /usr/share/man/ -na
Hiya Jan,
The following snippet from Ingo is correct:
> So, you want to hear something constructive? Your best option is to
> just decompress that stuff on your system. (Gentoo is famous for
> its excessive configurability - maybe there is even an option?)
We are both famous for our excessive
This is Gentoo 2.2 (4.4.6-gentoo x86_64).
The system manpages seem to be bzipped as in
/usr/share/man/man1/ls.1.bz2
Why is that? Is there any benefit to compressing the manpages nowadays?
IMHO it only adds a layer of complexity, for very questionable benefit
(i.e. disk space): how much of the over
31 matches
Mail list logo
