Severity: whishlist thanks On 12/27/2011 08:21 PM, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote: > Hello Bob, and thanks. > > Bob Friesenhahn wrote: >> >> The approach that lzip used satisifies the standard GNU-mandated >> configuration requirements. Due to using only standard C++, it only >> needs to configure aspects such as the compiler used and installation >> prefix. This approach leads to a very small source package similar to >> that of gzip and bzip2. The drawback of using standard C++ is that >> C++ has only been standardized since 1998 and a C++-runtime library >> is required in order for lzip to be used. This means that lzip might >> not be available in every possible circumstance (but there is always >> the gzip fallback). > > For those "possible circumstances" there is clzip[1], a C89 versión > of lzip. And for even more stripped down systems there is lunzip[2], > a small C89 decompressor. > > [1] http://www.nongnu.org/lzip/clzip.html > [2] http://www.nongnu.org/lzip/lunzip.html > > > BTW Stefano, what do you think about supporting parallel versions of > the compressors, like lbzip2 <http://freecode.com/projects/lbzip2> or > plzip <http://www.nongnu.org/lzip/plzip.html>? > I think it's about time we introduce an API that will allow maintainers to easily plug-in their own compressor :-) Implementing that shouldn't be too difficult, given the similarity and duplication among the various `dist-*' targets. The slightly trickier part will be devising an API that is complete and simple enough. I'm CC:ing bug-automake so that we won't forget about the issue.
Regards, Stefano
