[haiku-development] Re: Haiku package format
- From: Jérôme Duval <jerome.duval@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>, haiku-development <haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:37:23 +0200
Hi Ingo
I'm replying to the list, hope you don't mind.
Am 18.10.2017 10:19 nachm. schrieb "Ingo Weinhold" <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx>:
On 18.10.2017 18:52, Jérôme Duval wrote:
A question regarding https://dev.haiku-os.org/ticket/13742 :
TBH I'd prefer LZ4. Particularly with respect to the decompression speed
that seems to be the one that is best suited for use with packagefs ATM.
The headroom (considering compression vs. I/O speed) is shrinking quickly.
Yes that's another option which would deserve to be added. I'm considering
pushing this idea for GCI. Looks like possible to implement when looking at
the ZSTD patch.
On a repository server I would store packages that don't use compression
themselves but are compressed with an external tool that offers high
compression ratios (e.g. as foo.hpkg.xz). After download a package would be
recompressed for local use. The package tool features the recompress and
checksum commands in order to support that use case.
The ISO use case is nonetheless one that doesn't fit very well with non
compressed packages (or slow media in general).
is it OK to add a compression scheme to the current version of the haiku
package format? Or is it recommended to bump?
There's a major and a minor version that are supposed to be used similar to
the standard library versioning scheme. Major versions are for format
compatibility breaks. The minor version is incremented whenever features
are added that will not be understood by older tools, but may still allow
them to read some parts of the package.
When adding a new compression algorithm I would bump the minor version.
Thanks, we can actually reserve an ID for LZ4 while adding one for ZSTD.
Bye
Jerome
Other related posts:
