From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= Subject: Re: Compressed ISO image got bigger Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 22:37:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87k12j3yw5.fsf@gnu.org> References: <878sj1qcw7.fsf@gnu.org> <874ktnih0g.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34718) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jO5q0-0000Qf-9u for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 16:37:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Jonathan Brielmaier's message of "Mon, 13 Apr 2020 16:55:56 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Jonathan Brielmaier Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi, Jonathan Brielmaier skribis: > On 13.04.20 16:42, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> =E2=80=A2 The uncompressed ISO of rc2 is 2.6 times smaller than that o= f rc1. > > That is nice. > >> Thoughts? Ideas? > > In my understanding the size of the xz compressed iso is only relevant > for downloading. So a matter of bandwith and your internet connection. > > The extracted iso will be written on USB drives/DVDs/CDs, so their the > size matters and its good to see it shrinked down! So I don't see a real > problem here... I think the download size also matters, though to a lesser extent. It=E2=80=99d be ideal if we could have our cake and eat it too, but at any = rate the ISO size improvement is welcome! Ludo=E2=80=99.