Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933252Ab0BFXE6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Feb 2010 18:04:58 -0500 Received: from mail-iw0-f189.google.com ([209.85.223.189]:42953 "EHLO mail-iw0-f189.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932999Ab0BFXE5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 Feb 2010 18:04:57 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Wn91tVImf8zOPUQ5h59ExeaGZr6ynWTNVCly5ws83GOLVRFsOt7YbaHzkRTNSIGP7o fEjyxCUTwsUi115xpz30DPUIeiVLTNCgZi15wzwv34LJFPwuuMBKEJFb8lDY2KjukbFm NN66FOW0MjKfabnUEvqpf50xqeDojg/RjJMSM= Message-ID: <4B6DF5FD.5030708@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 15:06:37 -0800 From: "Justin P. Mattock" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20091114 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.33-rc7 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1852 Lines: 48 On 02/06/10 14:49, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sat, 6 Feb 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >> But we've certainly fixed a few things, and it's been a week, so here's >> -rc7. I wish I could say that it's the last -rc, but I strongly doubt >> that, and we'll almost certainly have at least one more. > > Oh, and I forgot to ask one thing I had intended to ask in the release > notes.. > > Do people really care about the old-fashioned tar.gz and patch.gz files? > I've always uploaded the tar-files and patches compressed with gzip, > because that's the "traditional" way, and then we have a script that also > re-compresses things as 'bz2' because it compresses better and many people > are bandwidth-limited and much prefer the better compression. > > Of course, if you really care about bandwidth, you're better off just > fetching the git trees instead, but the question for non-git users is: > > Would it be ok to _only_ have the 'bz2' patches and tar-balls? > > Having two copies of every large file seems silly, if nobody really > requires the traditional .gz format.. > > Linus > -- > 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/ > having .bz2 is always what I use, but one thing I've noticed if you have a system without bzip2(or whatever the package tar depends on), tar wont work with those. I'd say keep with .tar.gz this way any system will always uncompressed. Justin P. Mattock -- 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/