Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:20:40 -0400-
From: Phillip Susi <psusi@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: David Lang <dlang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Willy Tarreau <w@xxxxxx>, Drew Scott Daniels <ddaniels@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Smaller compressed kernel source tarballs?
It sounded like you were talking about a modified pack file that did NOT contain everything you need to get the current source. You said it would have no history and use aggressive delta compression to achieve a smaller size than a full tarball. If the pack contains the full previous version and the delta to the head version, then it will be larger than the tar, not smaller.
David Lang wrote:On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, Phillip Susi wrote:
David Lang wrote:I just had what's probably a silly thought.
as an alturnative to useing tar, what about useing a git pack?
create a git archive with no history, just the current files, and then pack it with agressive delta options.
Isn't that what a patch.gz is? Diff generates the deltas and then they are compressed. Can't get much simpler or better than that.
not quite, a git pack includes everythign you need to get the full source, a patch.gz requires that you have the prior version of the source to start with.
David Lang