Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 22:17:21 +0100 (MET)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>
To: Axel Kittenberger <axel.kittenberger@univie.ac.at>
cc: Folkert van Heusden <folkert@vanheusden.com>, Marc Singer <elf@buici.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Possible Bootloader Optimization in inflate (get rid of     
 unnecessary 32k Window)
In-Reply-To: <1379.81.217.14.229.1135545026.squirrel@webmail.univie.ac.at>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0512252215520.15152@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>
References: <200512221352.23393.axel.kernel@kittenberger.net>   
 <20051222173704.GB23411@buici.com>    <1167.81.217.14.229.1135275158.squirrel@webmail.univie.ac.at>
    <20051222183012.GA27353@buici.com>    <20051225210118.GB1498@vanheusden.com>
 <1379.81.217.14.229.1135545026.squirrel@webmail.univie.ac.at>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 790
Lines: 19


>> On the other hand it makes the kernel a few bytes smaller :-)
>
>Well on rather slow machines it is a bit faster indeed, I did code it 3
>years ago for an embedded system (embedded PowerPC). 'til now I just never
>found the time to offer a patch back to "vanilla" linux. I recently just
>thought I could ask maybe if it is after all desired even so....

Well if it's about size, why is not something better than gzip used yet?
Like bzip2, 7z or whatever comes to mind? Is it because of the amount of 
memory required for decompression?


Jan
-
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/