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.
pgpS2lsI0uARB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
