Re: dist-xz compression level

[Ralf Wildenhues]

Hello Andreas,

* Andreas Jellinghaus wrote on Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 09:37:13PM CEST:
> isn't xz extremely sloooow with -9?
> maybe it wasn't a bug, bit intentionally not used,
> as that huge extra amount of time doesn't result in
> that many bytes saved.

Well, does somebody have numbers (memory, time, compression) as to what
is reasonable?

> is the compression level configureable somehow?

Not ATM, but if necessary we could change that.

Thanks,
Ralf