Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

doc lz4 -1 changed to lz4 -l #1236

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 16, 2017
Merged

doc lz4 -1 changed to lz4 -l #1236

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 16, 2017

Conversation

ProBackup-nl
Copy link
Contributor

lz4 -l is necessary for Linux kernel boot compatibility, a separate branch and patch has already been pull request for that change in code. This patch also updates the documentation for that change. And it includes a table with an example to show the real life trade offs for extraction time, creation time and size based on an example.

lz4 -l is necessary for Linux kernel boot compatibility, a separate branch and patch has already been pull request for that change in code. This also updates the documentation.
@jsmeix jsmeix self-requested a review March 13, 2017 09:44
@jsmeix jsmeix self-assigned this Mar 13, 2017
@jsmeix jsmeix added documentation enhancement Adaptions and new features labels Mar 13, 2017
@jsmeix jsmeix added this to the Rear v2.1 milestone Mar 13, 2017
@jsmeix
Copy link
Member

jsmeix commented Mar 13, 2017

I will merge this one when I merge
#1235

@gdha
Copy link
Member

gdha commented Mar 13, 2017

@jsmeix @ProBackup-nl Perhaps wait a few days to merge this pull request as it was already added some days ago. I want to be sure it is a valid one.

@jsmeix
Copy link
Member

jsmeix commented Mar 13, 2017

@gdha
the actual change is in
#1235
and I think this cannot go wrong because
the lz4 initrd compression was newly added
by @ProBackup-nl and when he now changes it
there cannot be regressions.

@ProBackup-nl
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gdha The was insufficient testing in my initial commit. I only tested writing. I skipped the part to test that I could actually boot from is. Any suggestions what else I could/should test?

@jsmeix
Copy link
Member

jsmeix commented Mar 14, 2017

According to
#1236 (comment)
I will wait until Thursday and merge this one together with
#1235
on Thursday if there are no objections from @gdha

@jsmeix
Copy link
Member

jsmeix commented Mar 14, 2017

For some background information see
#1218 (comment)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants