On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Gordan Bobic <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gordan@bobich.net">gordan@bobich.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">Alejandro Mery wrote:<br>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 17:06, Gordan Bobic <<a href="mailto:gordan@bobich.net">gordan@bobich.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>> Weird. How big is the actual file? I would expect a reasonably<br>
>> minimalistic rootfs to compress down to < 150MB, which I wouldn't expect<br>
>> to get noticed.<br>
><br>
> it's a dd image of a 4GB SD card<br>
<br>
</div>That doesn't mean it should be significantly bigger than the tar ball if<br>
it was made cleanly. If you have a recent e2fsprogs and kernel you<br>
should get discard support on MMC, so a mkfs should blank all the unused<br>
blocks (i.e. those should all compress to not far from 0 bytes).<br>
<br>
From there on if you only did a minimal clean install (or extracted a<br>
rootfs tar ball), the compressed dd image shouldn't be _much_ bigger<br>
than a tar ball of the rootfs.<br>
<br>
Having said that, is there a good reason why a tar ball wouldn't be more<br>
useful anyway? It would let people format up the SD card in a way that<br>
may be more suitable to that particular card (e.g. different erase block<br>
sizes, etc.). SD cards are sufficiently slow that every small thing like<br>
that helps to make the performance bearable.<br><font color="#888888"><br></font></blockquote><div><br></div><div>There is a copy at <a href="https://s3.amazonaws.com/download.myriabit.com/mele-ubuntu-lucid.img.lzma">https://s3.amazonaws.com/download.myriabit.com/mele-ubuntu-lucid.img.lzma</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>I will extract the tarball as well.</div><div><br></div><div>Justin</div><div> </div></div>