Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On 03/02/2012 04:48 PM, Warren Young wrote:
>> On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Eric Blake wrote:
>> The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69;
> What problem are y'all trying to solve here?  Is running out of
> disk space or bandwidth?

No, space and bandwidth are not the primary driver.

> A better argument is the one behind RPM moving to xz: so they can keep
> adding bigger and more packages without moving to a second DVD.  But, I
> don't see that applying to

Actually, this really is part of the reason - since xz is technically
superior to gzip (better compression, same decompression speeds), we are
doing users a favor by getting xz installed and commonly available in
more places.

But enough people have complained, that for at least 2.69, I will still
ship a .gz tarball.

Eric Blake   eblake@xxxxxxxxxx    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Autoconf mailing list

[Index of Archives]     [GCC Help]     [Kernel Discussion]     [RPM Discussion]     [Red Hat Development]     [Yosemite News]     [USB]     [Samba]
  Powered by Linux