Re: [Rule-list] Is in the fly compression needed?

[Michael Fratoni]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Monday 27 May 2002 11:29 pm, Marco Fioretti wrote:
> Chris,
>
> the problem I see with compressing everything by default is that it
> would slow down both install and normal operation too much on the kind
> of processors and RAM settings likely to run RULE.
>
> If one runs RULE, often will also have little files needs (small
> number of small files), right?
>
> What do you think? Does a way to provide a choice to always do this or
> not at install time exists?

> On the issue of minimal disk space:
> http://www.linux.org/docs/ldp/howto/mini/Saving-Space.html#toc3
> suggests that stripping binaries, compressing executables with upx
> (http://upx.sourceforge.net/), and gzipping other files, using zlibc to
> transparently uncompress when needed.
>
>
> Couldn't this sort of thing be implemented with the $package.post.sh
> functionality to provide more room during installs on marginal
> machines?

I'm not sure on the compression issue, but I'd love to hear more about it.

The binaries in Red Hat's rpms, (as well as all of those used by the 
slinky installer) are stripped already (or should be). Normally, rpm 
uses:
strip -g and strip -R .comment -R .note for binaries, and 
strip --strip-unneeded for shared objects.

- -- 
- -Michael

pgp key:  http://www.tuxfan.homeip.net:8080/gpgkey.txt
Red Hat Linux 7.2 in 8M of RAM: http://www.rule-project.org/
- --
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjzzANsACgkQn/07WoAb/SsAZwCdFZTSjW0fs3kFhHgiwlf4PmXe
MocAoLzAD430rxosJkvEv+P52gP6W2+4
=CaU7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----