XZ-Utils 4.999.9beta

Guy Dalziel krendoshazin at dementedfury.org
Tue Sep 29 13:06:05 PDT 2009

On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 02:55:52PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> > 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 XZ.
> >  * The file format for it is arleady stable, +1 to XZ.
> >  * And tar uses too, +1 to XZ.
> You argue passionately, but you do not persuade.  What packages in LFS or BLFS 
> are not available as a .gz or a .bz2 package?

I would be more sympathetic to the argument if it hadn't taken place at
least 5 times already. Every time it was decided that we shall wait for
the stable release.
As you've said it's a standard CMMI package with no major dependencies
and that no package really makes use of. The only package we know to use it
is tar, and I can probably bet that it picks it up during configure
without any extra commands. So we're not in a position that requires it,
and since no package relies on it with a standard CMMI build I really
struggle to see any current need to include it at all.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-dev/attachments/20090929/5398aa45/attachment.sig>

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list