Re: install/54844: ``build.sh install-image'' fails with -V USE_PIGZGZIP=yes

[christos%zoulas.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

The following reply was made to PR install/54844; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: christos%zoulas.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)
To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost, install-manager%netbsd.org@localhost, 
	gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost, paul%whooppee.com@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: install/54844: ``build.sh install-image'' fails with -V USE_PIGZGZIP=yes
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 12:37:03 -0500

 On Jan 8,  4:45pm, paul%whooppee.com@localhost (Paul Goyette) wrote:
 -- Subject: Re: install/54844: ``build.sh install-image'' fails with -V USE_P
 
 | The following reply was made to PR install/54844; it has been noted by GNATS.
 | 
 | From: Paul Goyette <paul%whooppee.com@localhost>
 | To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
 | Cc: martin%duskware.de@localhost
 | Subject: Re: install/54844: ``build.sh install-image'' fails with -V
 |  USE_PIGZGZIP=yes
 | Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 08:42:50 -0800 (PST)
 | 
 |  On Wed, 8 Jan 2020, Paul Goyette wrote:
 |  
 |  > I'm not so sure this is just a size issue.  At one point I actually
 |  > looked at the contents of the work directory, and found _another_
 |  > work directory a couple levels down.  The lower-level work directory
 |  > seemed to be the correct size.
 |  >
 |  > Perhaps there are some conflicting command-line args that work for
 |  > xz but not for pigz?  (Guesing: Perhaps related to sym-links?)
 |  
 |  Well, I just checked again, and I don't see the "nested" work directory.
 |  
 |  So perhapas setting the size as you suggest is appropriate.
 
 But why is it that much bigger?
 
 christos