On 04/02/14 12:06, Glen Barber wrote: > On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:55:33AM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: >> On 04/02/14 11:51, Glen Barber wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 10:40:22AM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote: >>>> On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 10:41:27PM +0000, Glen Barber wrote: >>>>> Author: gjb >>>>> Date: Tue Apr 1 22:41:26 2014 >>>>> New Revision: 264027 >>>>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/264027 >>>>> >>>>> Log: >>>>> Add a new release build variable, WITH_COMPRESSED_IMAGES. >>>>> >>>>> When set to a non-empty value, the installation medium is >>>>> compressed with gzip(1) as part of the 'install' target in >>>>> the release/ directory. >>>>> >>>>> With gzip(1) compression, downloadable image are reduced in >>>>> size quite significantly. Build test against head@263927 >>>>> shows the following: >>>>> >>>>> bootonly.iso: 64% smaller >>>>> disc1.iso: 44% smaller >>>>> memstick.img: 47% smaller >>>>> mini-memstick.img: 65% smaller >>>>> dvd1.iso: untested >>>>> >>>>> This option is off by default, I would eventually like to >>>>> turn it on by default, and remove the '-k' flag to gzip(1) >>>>> so only compressed images are published on FTP. >>>> >>>> I'd recommend testing xz compression as well. With UFS images of a full >>>> world the savings vs gzip are significant (more than 30% IIRC, but it's >>>> need more than a year since I checked so I'm a bit unsure of the exact >>>> numbers). >>>> >>> >>> delphij also brought this up. >>> >>> I have concerns with xz(1), since there was mention in IRC that Windows >>> users may have problems decompressing xz-compressed images. So, gzip(1) >>> is used because it seems to be the more commonly-supported archive >>> mechanisms. >>> >>> The benefit of xz(1) over gzip(1) was only 50M-ish. >>> >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 601M Mar 28 20:18 disc1.iso >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 381M Mar 28 20:18 disc1.iso.bz2 >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 392M Mar 28 20:18 disc1.iso.gz >>> -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 348M Mar 28 20:18 disc1.iso.xz >>> >>> Glen >>> >> >> How about 7zip (Windows program, not file format)? What would a Windows >> user use that can decompress gzip and not xz? It was a problem around >> ~2007, but xz support is no longer rare or exotic. >> > > I don't know, to be honest. I have no Windows machines to test, so > I can only go by what I am told. > > Glen >
I just verified it with 7zip for Windows version 9.22. It extracts .tar.xz archives and decompresses .xz images. - Nikolai Lifanov _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
