On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 07:03:50AM -0700, Fernando Oliveira wrote: > --- Em qui, 24/3/11, Ken Moffat <[email protected]> escreveu: > > Hi, Ken, > > Using the link you provided above, I have replaced the 9.00 tar.gz by the > tar.xz, 10M smaller. I agree with William (if I remember correctly) who > suggested use of xz whenever available, in the book, furthermore considering > that xz package is now standard in LFS: > > [ ] ghostscript-9.00.tar.bz2 19-Sep-2010 16:03 22M > [ ] ghostscript-9.00.tar.gz 19-Sep-2010 16:03 27M > [ ] ghostscript-9.00.tar.xz 19-Sep-2010 16:03 17M > For my own builds, I prefer the .xz versions (I used to be very short of space, and my connection is still slow). At one time, BLFS was targetted for the previous LFS release, which didn't have xz.
In fact, on one of my older systems I had to upgrade tar to get it to use xz. So, using .xz versions will inconvenience some users and probably still needs to be justified. Changing the book back to .bz2 would have created unnecessary work for Bruce to copy another tarball. Not that I'm really concerned about what the book does any more, I only fixed this because it was my mistake. > I am curious about IceCat: do you build it against xulrunner? > > Thanks again. > No, I don't have any need for xulrunner (epiphany uses webkit, and I use debian's webkit version of yelp - nothing else I build uses gecko). But, I only use it on two machines (both ppc, as it happens) because for my main desktops I got annoyed by the delays between a new firefox release and the corresponding icecat release. It's fine, but it doesn't pick up existing firefox data for e.g. bookmarks. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
