Re: [PATCH 2/2] archive: avoid spawning `gzip`
- Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 17:36:59 -0400
- From: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] archive: avoid spawning `gzip`
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 10:16:46PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> > The alternative is that we could use a special token like ":zlib" or
> > something to indicate that the internal implementation should be used
> > (and then tweak the baked-in default, too). That might be less
> > surprising for users, but most people would still get the benefit since
> > they'd be using the default config.
> I agree that a special value (or NULL, if that's possible) would be
> nicer here. That way, if someone does specify a custom gzip, we honor
> it, and it serves to document the code better. For example, if someone
> symlinked pigz to gzip and used "gzip -cn", then they might not get the
> parallelization benefits they expected.
Thanks for spelling that out. I had a vague feeling somebody might be
surprised, but I didn't know if people actually did stuff like
symlinking pigz to gzip (though it makes perfect sense to do so).
> I'm fine overall with the idea of bringing the compression into the
> binary using zlib, provided that we preserve the "-n" behavior
> (producing reproducible archives).
I just assumed that gzwrite() would have the "-n" behavior, but it's
definitely worth double-checking.