7z (Was: 64 bit DMD binary on the Mac)

[Jimmy Cao]

The 7-Zip archiver supports it.

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Andrew Wiley <wiley.andrew.j at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Jimmy Cao <jcao219 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Andrew Wiley <wiley.andrew.j at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Nick Sabalausky <a at a.a> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Michel Fortin" <michel.fortin at michelf.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:iudhf9$2dr9$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>> > On 2011-06-28 15:39:42 -0400, Walter Bright <
>>>> newshound2 at digitalmars.com>
>>>> > said:
>>>> >
>>>> >> On 6/28/2011 12:13 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>>> >>> Since most of the applications and most the libraries (basically all
>>>> >>> that ships
>>>> >>> with Mac OS X) are universal there's usually no problem of
>>>> >>> running/building both
>>>> >>> 32 and 64bit software.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I'll explain the motivation for 64 bit only DMD binaries:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 1. It cuts the testing time in half. This is a significant deal for
>>>> me,
>>>> >> as adding another hour to the test cycle slows things down a lot.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> 2. It speeds downloading the dmd package.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The only reason to have a 32 bit binary is if there are x86 Macs 10.5
>>>> or
>>>> >> later that are incapable of running 64 bit code.
>>>> >
>>>> > Well, you could ship the next DMD version 64-bit only and of you get
>>>> > complains you bring back the 32-bit version as a universal binary.
>>>> >
>>>> > But you'll definitely rule out users of Apple's early Intel computers.
>>>> I
>>>> > think the last Apple model with a 32-bit CPU was the "Mac Mini (Late
>>>> > 2006)", which was replaced mid 2007 with a Core 2 Duo model.
>>>> >
>>>> > As for increasing the download speed, you could try one of these too:
>>>> >
>>>> > * separate per-OS packages
>>>> > * separate source package
>>>> > * separate documentation package
>>>> > * faster server
>>>>
>>>> * use 7z
>>>>
>>>> Using 7z instead of zip or tarballs has shrunk the size of my packaged
>>>> Goldie releases down to roughly one-quarter the size of a zip or tar.bz2
>>>> (Yes, ~75% decrease is size). Of course, that's probably an extreme
>>>> case,
>>>> but I just tried making a 7z of DMD 2.053, and it came out to just under
>>>> 9MB
>>>> (vs just over 15MB for the official zip release), so fairly close to
>>>> half
>>>> the size. Still pretty damn good.
>>>>
>>>> And I really see no reason why any programmer shouldn't have a
>>>> 7z-capable
>>>> extractor these days. Heck, it's pretty typical on Linux, and it's built
>>>> into WinRar. Zip and tarballs are like MP3's: They're still everywhere,
>>>> but
>>>> only because of inertia, not because of any inherent merit, of which
>>>> there
>>>> really isn't any. 7z is like moving to Vorbis (Except that I think 7z
>>>> support is probably more common than Vorbis support, which is
>>>> unfortunate
>>>> for Vorbis fans like me, but that's even more OT...).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Have you tried xz on Linux? I think WinRar supports it on Windows, but I
>>> haven't checked in a while.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I just tried using WinRAR to open a tar.xz file, and it didn't work.
>>
>
> Ah, then I suppose I'm a liar and/or delusional. I remember opening one on
> Windows with some archiver, but I've only ever done it a few times, and not
> on a box I have access to at the moment.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20110628/da4561b2/attachment.html>