Am Sonntag, 4. September 2011, 17:30:11 schrieb Per Jessen:
Ralf Lang wrote:
Am Sonntag, 4. September 2011, 15:51:28 schrieb Per Jessen:
Philipp Thomas wrote:
On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 00:51:09 +0200, Rüdiger Meier <sweet_f_a@gmx.de>
wrote:
To say it again I like pigz. But renaming ... ?
Why not replacing it in /usr/bin/compress - the Posix way to define a Z compressor. If user asks for gzip please give him gzip.
Then 99% of all users will continue to use gzip just because they don't know better.
Which isn't really a problem, is it?
If it wasn't viewed as the wrong thing, the question had not been raised.
Thank you, I am aware of that. I was trying to argue that that view is wrong.
Ok, then I missunderstood you a bit. Thank you for clarifying. In the sense of 'it has been working before' you are certainly right. In the sense of 'this is the right way for now and later', I am not so certain. This is, if interfaces are in fact compatible (there was some dispute on this). If the process accepts the gzip input parameters and spits out gzip files, I see no need to guarantee which 'gzipper' sits in between. The arguments for using gzip at all in automated tasks are fast results and backwards compatibility - as opposed to best feasible compression. Speed could be improved by pigz, compatibility of the resulting archives is not broken. -- Ralf Lang Linux Consultant / Developer B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org