Re: us.kernel.org mirroring inconsistency

Matti Aarnio (matti.aarnio@sonera.fi)
Tue, 5 Jan 1999 23:54:36 +0200 (EET)


...
> So what's wrong with using the GNU version of tar that's supplied with
> most of the Linux distributions. I've just tried it out, and the
> following command deals with the 2.2.0-pre4 kernel quite happily...
>
> Q> tar tv --use-compress bzip2 -f l*2.2*4*2
>
> As far as I know, that version of tar is included in every version of
> Linux there is, as well as being provided with SunSolaris...

That method is about two dozen characters too cumbersome.
Way easier is just forget 'z' (and 'f') and do:
bunzip2 < your.interesting.tar.bz2 | tar tvv

The question begun as `` Shall the mirrors be required to always
carry both GZ and BZ2 files, or shall only one of the forms be
standardized into use ? If the latter, which ? ''

If the primary archive chooses to have ONLY BZ2 files, and no GZ,
I would have no trouble (I would even like it for space reasons), but
given the selection in between two existing sets of files, each complete
in themselves, I am conservative and support long established GZ format
based on existing easy to use, and familiar (to large number of people)
tools.

Doubling the disk-space requirement for the mirror by having two merely
differently compressed formats is not something mirror runners like, as
both subsets have size exceeding 2 GB, storing both of them into the
archive is by no means a trivial thing to do. We do have to choose what
to store/mirror, and there a 2G volume is a decission item.

Another issue is that in Finland all major (and minor) ISPs offer flat-
rate dialin services rendering the question about download time quite
irrelevant in here...

/Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@sonera.fi>

-
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/