Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 19:10:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 19:10:55 -0500 Received: from mail.jlokier.co.uk ([81.29.64.88]:27777 "EHLO mail.jlokier.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 19 Mar 2003 19:10:54 -0500 Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:21:27 +0000 From: Jamie Lokier To: Tigran Aivazian Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , mirrors , linux-kernel Subject: Re: Deprecating .gz format on kernel.org Message-ID: <20030320002127.GB7887@mail.jlokier.co.uk> References: <3E78D0DE.307@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 929 Lines: 26 On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > i) Does this sound reasonable to everyone? In particular, is there any > loss in losing the "original" compressed files? Personally I fetch the .bz2 tar files for a few base kernel versions, but I fetch the .gz patch files. This is so that I can "zgrep" through the patch files looking for which version changed some feature or API. bzgrep exists, but it is way too slow. So if there were only .bz2 patch files, I would fetch them and convert them back into .gz files on my local mirror. Which is ok of course, but then the signatures don't match any more. Well, that's my really weak reason for liking .gz patches. enjoy, -- Jamie - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/