Re: [lzip-bug] FYI: Serious Design Flaws

[Tim Rühsen]

Hi Antonio,

reports without details (e.g. command line, timings, how to reproduce,
...) are not worth our time. Especially when actively refusing any details.

Happy New Year !

Regards, Tim


On 31.12.19 18:15, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> Two weeks ago, John L. Males reported "serious design issues that cause
> extremely serious consequences", but he refused to explain what issues
> he had found. Later, in a private message he defined the issues as lzip
> compressing much slower than gzip (literally "as in minutes vs days")
> under certain circumstances that he didn't reveal.
> 
> As Mr. Males stated that he has no desire to provide any further
> information (not even the options that he passed to gzip and lzip), I'm
> asking here if anybody has ever observed a behavior as the one described
> by Mr. Males (lzip compressing about 1000 times slower than gzip).
> 
> If you find such "slow-compressing data", please, tell me so that I can
> at least document how to speed up compression is that case.
> 
> As an example of what I'm *not* looking for, I once measured 'lzip -9'
> compressing 56 times slower than 'gzip -9'. It happened with a system
> log file, a kind of file that tends to be very compressible and slow to
> compress. This is normal. 'lzip -9' uses a dictionary size 1024 times
> larger than 'gzip -9'. Therefore it is expected to compress better and
> be slower. In this case the "problem" can be "fixed" by using 'lzip -0',
> which can compress these kind of files better and in about the same time
> as 'gzip -6'.
> 
> -rw-r--r-- 1 19368375 2009-02-12 02:06 warn
> -rw-r--r-- 1   966530 2009-02-12 02:06 warn.gz
> -rw-r--r-- 1   660487 2009-02-12 02:06 warn-0.lz
> -rw-r--r-- 1   328203 2009-02-12 02:06 warn-9.lz
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Antonio.
>

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature