1 |
El sáb, 31-03-2012 a las 17:33 -0700, Zac Medico escribió: |
2 |
> On 03/31/2012 04:25 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: |
3 |
> > On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:42:50AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote |
4 |
> >> On 03/31/2012 06:34 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
5 |
> >>> About the wiki page, I can only document reiserfs+tail usage as it's the |
6 |
> >>> one I use and I know, about other alternatives like using squashfs, loop |
7 |
> >>> mount... I cannot promise anything as I simply don't know how to set |
8 |
> >>> them. |
9 |
> >> |
10 |
> >> Squashfs is really simple to use: |
11 |
> >> |
12 |
> >> mksquashfs /usr/portage portage.squashfs |
13 |
> >> mount -o loop portage.squashfs /usr/portage |
14 |
> > |
15 |
> > Don't the "space-saving filesystems" (squashfs, reiserfs-with-tail, |
16 |
> > etc) run more slowly due to their extra finicky steps to save space? If |
17 |
> > you really want to save a gigabyte or 2, run "eclean -d distfiles" and |
18 |
> > "localepurge" after every emerge update. I've also cobbled together my |
19 |
> > own "autodepclean" script that check for, and optionally unmerges |
20 |
> > unneeded stuff that was pulled in as a dependancy of a package that has |
21 |
> > since been removed. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> Well, in this case squashfs is more about improving access time than |
24 |
> saving space. You end up with the whole tree stored in a mostly |
25 |
> contiguous chunk of disk space, which minimizes seek time. |
26 |
|
27 |
Would be possible to generate and provide squashed files at the same |
28 |
time tarballs with portage tree snapshots are generated? mksquashfs can |
29 |
take a lot of resources depending on the machine, but providing the |
30 |
squashed images would still benefit people allowing them to download and |
31 |
mount them |