On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn <chith...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Michael Mol schrieb: >> A few months ago, I filed bug 423651 to ask that bzip2 on the install >> media be replaced with >> pbzip2. > > If I understand correctly, pbzip2 depends on bzip2. So what you are > asking is that pbzip2 is preferred over bzip2 when both are installed, > and that pbzip2 is installed by default?
pbzip2 uses libbzip2, which I understand bzip2 to also be a wrapper around. > > I have so far encountered only one anecdotal case in #gentoo IRC where > pbzip2[symlink] caused problems in emerging a package. Disabling the > symlink flag made the problem go away. However I can't point to the > report right now, maybe someone with searchable backlog can uncover it. pbzip2[symlink] is more or less the scenario I'd like to see. > > A different question is whether in the cases where parallel bzip2 makes > sense, is it really the best solution? xz is outperforming bzip2's > compression ratio for large files (for an informal comparison, see bug > 434350). And xz is faster at decompression, which offsets the parallel > advantage to some degree. xz is faster for decompression, by my inspiration case was during system installation, so compression. Last I looked, xz was still very slow for threaded compression. And it's not block-oriented, so I don't think that's really possible without loss of compression efficiency, anyway...and my use cases range from 4-8 physical cores. -- :wq
