On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Dan McGee<dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Tobias Powalowski<t.powa@gmx.de> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:19 AM, Tobias Powalowski<t.powa@gmx.de> wrote:
Hi guys, kernel26-2.6.30-2 please signoff, both arches. And tell me your opinion about madwifi and openswan-klisp
Arch Linux changes: - changed to lzma kernel compression
Any real reason for this besides the fact that it is newer and sexier? It is also slower, and I doubt we have many Arch users that need the benefits of a slightly smaller compressed kernel on disk (esp since it all needs to be unpacked in memory anyway). Hrm talked to thomas about it, if it's an issue of bootup speed we can revert
Am Freitag 12 Juni 2009 schrieb Dan McGee: this again, imho it's not that different at least on my machine. Anyone else who has objections in using lzma instead of gzip compressed kernel?
I probably came across a bit too against this- it really isn't a big deal either way, I just figured there wasn't much of a reason to go for a different compression scheme than gzip. I'm fine with whatever the maintainer(s) want to go with.
I wonder why people are so gung-ho for lzma these days? It's been around for a while, where did the sudden "OMG THIS IS SO AWESOME" thing come from?