| 1 |
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Florian Philipp <lists@×××××××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 26.09.2012 22:43, schrieb Matt Turner: |
| 3 |
>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> A few months ago, I filed bug 423651 to ask that bzip2 on the install |
| 5 |
>>> media be replaced with |
| 6 |
>>> pbzip2. It was closed a short while later, telling me that it'd |
| 7 |
>>> involve changing what's kept in @system, and that had to be discussed |
| 8 |
>>> here, rather than in a bug report. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> If we're going to ship a parallel bzip2 implementation, it should be |
| 11 |
>> lbzip2 and not pbzip2. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> lbzip2 can decompress bz2 archives with multiple threads that haven't |
| 14 |
>> been compressed with lbzip2/pbzip2. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> This seems relevant, especially comment 12ff: |
| 18 |
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=309683 |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> For further anecdotal evidence: I've used pbzip2 with USE="symlink" for |
| 21 |
> several months now and never had trouble with it. Checking out lbzip2 |
| 22 |
> now. I noticed it doesn't install a bunzip2 symlink. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Piotr Szymaniak asked me about lbzip2, and I bounced the question over |
| 25 |
to my friend. He didn't investigate it deeply; it crashed (OOM or |
| 26 |
something else, I don't know) when he tried it on a large file. Could |
| 27 |
have been from 2GB to 2TB, from what he has laying around. I don't |
| 28 |
know; I didn't get that one in writing. :) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
But if it proves to be stable for small and very large files, I'd have |
| 31 |
no complaint. :) |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
:wq |
Archives