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 gnu.org 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 gnu.org.

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 http://libvirt.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf

[GCC Help]     [Kernel Discussion]     [RPM Discussion]     [Red Hat Development]     [Yosemite News]     [USB]     [Samba]

Add to Google Powered by Linux