>> I'm getting a bit disturbed by an inconsistency between the
>> kernel.org mirrors. For example, I have just connected to
>> katelyn.optilinkcomm.net, which apparently carries only bz2 files
>> and not gz files.
> That is foolish, in fact I think the BZ2 at this point is foolish
> thing to do as the only compression algorithm. In case of
> ftp.kernel.org archive:
> gz 2.4 GB
> bz2 2.1 GB
> That is, the 'bz2' version of compression is only about 1/8:th
> denser, than gzip.
Try 1/7th, or 21% (at least based on your figures)...
> Way back when the BSD compress got into trouble with LZW patents,
> the rapid move to GNU-zip was well founded, but now such a thing is
> not really warranted.
Obviously you don't have to pay for your time connected to the
Internet! I do, as do most others in the UK and several other
countries!!!
That may only be 1/8th denser, but it's 300 Megs and that equates to
quite a few lumps of brass...
Also, try comparing individual tarballs: The latest kernel tarball
shows as follows:
gz 12.4 MB
bz2 10.0 MB
That makes the gz tarball 24% larger than the bz2 one, and even at 56k
Baud, downloading an extra 2.4 MB costs money...
===8<=== Irrelevant comments cut ===>8===
> This thinking is basis on why ftp.funet.fi does not mirror BZ2
> files if the same files are also available as GZ files.
What's the access rate to ftp.funet.fi from sites that have to pay for
their connections?
===8<=== Further irrelevant comments cut ===>8===
Best wishes from Riley.
--- * ftp://ps.cus.umist.ac.uk/pub/rhw/Linux * http://ps.cus.umist.ac.uk/~rhw/kernel.versions.html
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/