Rockbox mail archive
Subject: Re: make the cvs build zips smaller?
Re: make the cvs build zips smaller?
another reason to move lng and wps out of the zip is because even if
ppl do use a different language from english.. they would only use one
other file.. so y put them all in the zip.. sort of the same for
wps... and fonts.
can he lng's be moved to a seperate part of the dowload page? (have a
drop list with the available languages, and another for the targets,
then a button and it will upload the correct file to u..?)
On 05/05/06, bk <email@example.com> wrote:
> I did some quick and dirty compression testing today on an H120 build
> zip (size is in kbyte, rounded to the nearest 4k):
> (original) rockbox.zip 2046
> (gzip -9) rockbox.tar.gz 1794 (12%)
> (bzip2) rockbox.tar.bz2 1802 (12%)
> (p7zip) rockbox.tar.7z 1297 (37%)
> (rzip -9) rockboz.tar.rz 1738 (15%)
> Interesting that the bzip2 tarball actually came out slightly bigger
> than the gzip tarball. This shows that with small files compression
> statistics can get a little strange. Clearly 7zip is the winner, but
> even then it's only saving 750k per build.
> Here's a table showing the uncompressed space used by each top-level
> directory in an H120 build (this is /usr/bin/du output so there's some
> 0 ./eqs
> 1.3M ./wps
> 20K ./docs
> 3.9M ./fonts
> 253K ./langs
> 882K ./rocks
> 588K ./codecs
> 36K ./themes
> 232K ./viewers
> 0 ./backdrops
> 260K ./codepages
> 7.4M .
> Out of a total of 7.4MB, the binary and lang components take up 2.22MB.
> The themes/WPS/fonts take up 5.24MB (~70% of the total). Separating the
> two would be a big space/bandwidth win.
Received on Fri May 5 03:48:09 2006
Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew