#include <hallo.h>
* Colin Watson [Mon, Aug 22 2011, 09:27:25AM]:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 05:39:08PM +0200, Iustin Pop wrote:
> > Since liblzmaX exists, would it be a simple matter of using it in order
> > to make mandb handle such compressed man pages without having to fork?
>
> I don't want to add more linkage, especially in light of Adam's point
> about xz not being worth it for most manual pages anyway.

Would you consider additional linkage to libdl? That is less than 15kB
size and brings possibility to load liblzma as needed.

In fact, I have an almost complete patch for man-db which dlopens
on-the-fly. Let me know if I should proceed with that.

Regards,
Eduard.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110822134904.GA19138@rotes76.wohnheim.uni-kl.de">http://lists.debian.org/20110822134904.GA19138@rotes76.wohnheim.uni-kl.de

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 03:49:04PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include <hallo.h>
> * Colin Watson [Mon, Aug 22 2011, 09:27:25AM]:
> > I don't want to add more linkage, especially in light of Adam's point
> > about xz not being worth it for most manual pages anyway.
>
> Would you consider additional linkage to libdl? That is less than 15kB
> size and brings possibility to load liblzma as needed.
>
> In fact, I have an almost complete patch for man-db which dlopens
> on-the-fly. Let me know if I should proceed with that.

Given that it apparently doesn't gain much in the way of size
improvements, I don't really see the point. But I'd look at a patch if
it doesn't make the code significantly less portable or significantly
harder to maintain.

--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@debian.org]


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110822203514.GB5196@riva.dynamic.greenend.org.uk ">http://lists.debian.org/20110822203514.GB5196@riva.dynamic.greenend.org.uk

#include <hallo.h>
* Colin Watson [Mon, Aug 22 2011, 09:35:14PM]:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 03:49:04PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > #include <hallo.h>
> > * Colin Watson [Mon, Aug 22 2011, 09:27:25AM]:
> > > I don't want to add more linkage, especially in light of Adam's point
> > > about xz not being worth it for most manual pages anyway.
> >
> > Would you consider additional linkage to libdl? That is less than 15kB
> > size and brings possibility to load liblzma as needed.
> >
> > In fact, I have an almost complete patch for man-db which dlopens
> > on-the-fly. Let me know if I should proceed with that.
>
> Given that it apparently doesn't gain much in the way of size
> improvements, I don't really see the point. But I'd look at a patch if
> it doesn't make the code significantly less portable or significantly
> harder to maintain.

Agreed. I stopped coding after realizing that you don't gain anything if
the typical file size is within one or two filesystem blocks.

A copy is stored on
http://alioth.debian.org/~blade/mandb_dlopens_liblzma.diff , feel free
to add it or ignore it.

Regards,
Eduard.
--
Naja, Garbage Collector eben. Holt den Müll sogar vom Himmel.
(Heise Trollforum über Java in der Flugzeugsteuerung)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110822210339.GA13320@rotes76.wohnheim.uni-kl.de">http://lists.debian.org/20110822210339.GA13320@rotes76.wohnheim.uni-kl.de

Carsten Hey dixit:

>IIRC bzip2 had a better compression. Compressing dpkg's changelog on
>stable seems confirm this:

xz’s default compression level -6 is not good for files
smaller than 8 MiB. Try -2 instead, maybe -2e (slower).
Besides, it decompresses a lot faster than bzip2, so even
in case of a (slight) size increase from bzip2 to xz, I’d
choose xz every day anyway.

bye,
//mirabilos, wondering how many *.gz don’t use gzip -n9 either
--
FWIW, I'm quite impressed with mksh interactively. I thought it was much
*much* more bare bones. But it turns out it beats the living hell out of
ksh93 in that respect. I'd even consider it for my daily use if I hadn't
wasted half my life on my zsh setup. :-) -- Frank Terbeck in #!/bin/mksh


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: Pine.BSM.4.64L.1205221227450.23033@herc.mirbsd.org ">http://lists.debian.org/Pine.BSM.4.64L.1205221227450.23033@herc.mirbsd.org