Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Message-ID: <20000228132715.29158.qmail@web114.yahoomail.com> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 05:27:15 -0800 (PST) From: Earnie Boyd Reply-To: earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com Subject: Re: Installation Routine To: DJ Delorie , cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii --- DJ Delorie wrote: -8<- > > bzip2 takes a ton more CPU than gzip, for a less-than-corresponding > increase in compression, and is less popular (i.e. less likely to be > found on a standard linux install, for example). The gains in file > size are not that exciting given the vastly larger amount of CPU > needed to deal with them, but when you have to transfer big files over > the Internet, it is still a net gain. However, for cygwin, there are > no technical reasons not to switch. > > In my case, where I'm creating tarballs all the time, the extra CPU > needed to build them is annoying, but I can be convinced to switch for > the official distributions. > I'm hoping to convince you _NOT_ to switch. All the bzip2 files I get I end up doing bunzip2 foo.bz2 && gzip foo just to convert them. As you've stated bzip2 isn't standard and the archive tools that people have don't support it yet, especially on Win32. > Plus, you can't use "tar xvfz ..." to extract them :-( > I believe there exists a patch to add a new filter switch. Regards, ===== --- Earnie Boyd: __Cygwin: POSIX on Windows__ Cygwin Newbies: __Minimalist GNU for Windows__ Mingw32 List: Mingw Home: (Coming Soon) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com