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

Option to output contents to directory, skipping compression #16

Open
garrison opened this issue Sep 1, 2021 · 5 comments
Open

Option to output contents to directory, skipping compression #16

garrison opened this issue Sep 1, 2021 · 5 comments

Comments

@garrison
Copy link

garrison commented Sep 1, 2021

It would be nice if one could choose a lower compression ratio for the xz compression to speed it up. In my case, I immediately spk unpack the resulting spk (in order to spk dev, but also for the fake-proc trick), so there is no sense in waiting for it to achieve maximum compression -- it only serves to slow down the development/test cycle.

@zenhack
Copy link
Owner

zenhack commented Sep 1, 2021

Hm, it seems like for your use case it might just be better to provide a way to skip building the .spk entirely, and just output the contents to a directory.

@zenhack
Copy link
Owner

zenhack commented Sep 1, 2021

I'm thinking a --directory flag to docker-spk build.

@garrison
Copy link
Author

garrison commented Sep 1, 2021

Yes, that would make even more sense.

@garrison garrison changed the title Option to lower compression level Option to output contents to directory, skipping compression Sep 2, 2021
@garrison
Copy link
Author

I realized a few things this evening.

  1. If my goal is to output the contents to a directory, skipping compression, then I can do this using Docker alone, bypassing docker-spk.
  2. Part of what precipitated me realizing the prior point and working around it is that I first realized that docker-spk build requires my keyring since it generates an intermediate spk. I wanted to adjust my development instructions in my port's README so that they would work for anyone.

I am still grateful that docker-spk got me started, even if I am not using it at the moment.

@zenhack
Copy link
Owner

zenhack commented Sep 27, 2021

Glad you worked your way through it. Yeah, it probably isn't actually helpful in your case then. Hopefully I'll eventually get around to supporting searchPath, so it isn't necessary to spk unpack for the /proc stuff.

I'm going to leave this open though; it would still I think be reasonable to add this as a flag.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants