matthew at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Sep 29 12:50:17 PDT 2009
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:41:01 -0500, William Immendorf <will.immendorf at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop73 at googlemail.com>
>> I'm listening, and watching, but for the moment I don't
>> see any reason to put it in the book as a beta - for the
>> moment we can still get packages as .tar.gz.
> You don't see any reason? You need to look a lot closer:
> * Fedora, Arch, CLFS, and Slackware use it arleady, so +4 points to XZ.
> * This release is very close to a stable release, another +1 point to
> * The file format for it is arleady stable, +1 to XZ.
> * And tar uses too, +1 to XZ.
But those aren't any reasons to *use* it. What *requires* the use of the .xz file
format that isn't also available in .gz or .bz2 files? Unless there is something,
this package is simply a *nice to have*, not a necessity, and therefore can be
delayed until an editor really decides it's an itch that needs scratching. Of course,
if someone were to provide a patch to the book that added the XZ-Utils package to the
book then I'm sure someone is more likely to review and apply it.
It takes considerable effort to add a package to the book, validate the instructions
and continue to maintain the package. You should not expect anyone to respond to
your demands, William, especially when the need for the package being requested is
More information about the blfs-dev