Bug#718792: RFS: fio 2.11

[Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl>]

On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 08:52:47PM +0200, Sven Hoexter wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 04:57:41PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> a) Is it worth to switch to xz for this package?
> b) Is it a good idea to force the compression-level to 9?
> 
> For a) I think maybe for b) I guess buildd maintainers and maybe even
> devs of weaker arches might hate you. I've no good idea myself how
> xz works internally but if I recall the threads on d-d correctly about
> making xz the default a compression level above 6 was deemed way too much.
> I think even lower levels were proposed as a Debian default when xz will
> be the default compression method.

xz is already the default.

I don't think micromanaging the compressor in every package is a good idea,
especially for a regular package without special needs.  Setting it on
openclipart (big, no gain) or linux-image-dbg (big and highly compressible)
is worth the effort, using something non-standard on a random package is
not -- and will bring us extra work if some policy changes.

So let's not muck with compression settings without a good reason.

-- 
ᛊᚨᚾᛁᛏᚣ᛫ᛁᛊ᛫ᚠᛟᚱ᛫ᚦᛖ᛫ᚹᛖᚨᚲ