El Sun, 03 Mar 2013 22:43:58 -0600
Rob Landley <[email protected]> escribió:
> On 03/01/2013 11:33:46 AM, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote:
> > Dear Denys.
> > The mistake here would be to reject lzip...
> 
> You deny the busybox maintainer's reality, and substitute your own!

No. Antonio is proposing the replacement of unlzma here, adding lzip
along with xz.
 
> >> The current situation looks pretty simple:
> >> lzip and xz are roughly the same feature-wise,
> > 
> > The only feature for which lzip and xz are roughly the same is  
> > compression
> > speed/size. Sadly it seems the only feature ever tested/cared for
> > by most users.
> 
> Gee, I wonder why?

"speed" and "size" are visible factors in a compressor. But also a
compressor is about "integrity checkings" and prevent "data
corruption"; specially if you are thinking in long-term archiving,
these are the most important factors.

> Stop and think, what is any compression code in busybox _for_? The
> only reason to have xz in busybox at all is because there are a lot
> of existing tar.xz files out there. It is an existing, deployed file  
> format which busybox wants to be compatible with.

Which is the criterion _for_?. An application is "useful",
"widely-used", and we want to be "practical"?. Even if the program does
not provide any guarantee (at least) to preserve your files!?.

Busybox can include an Internet Explorer version.

> You're saying that you've got a new super compression format called
> arj or zoo or stuffit or binhex or whatever it is, and you'd very
> much like to shoehorn it into busybox in hopes of getting it wider
> adoption.

A lot of babies are waiting for adoption.

> Denys said no. You're getting huffy about it. I await the flounce.
> 
> >> Therefore, in their real-world use, Busybox users will need
> >> to unpack *xz* files. Such as kernel tarballs from kernel.org,
> >> distribution .rpms with internally-xz'ed cpio archives,
> >> and many other things.
> > 
> > This sees users as consumers. What about the users who want to
> > create their
> > own compressed files?
> 
> They might want to do so in a format that people they send it to
> would previously have heard of. Given how bad an ambassador you are
> for your preferred choice, I'm guessing lzma ain't ever gonna be it.
> 
> > Not counting that any Busybox user wanting to check the integrity
> > of files will
> > avoid xz files anyway. Kernel tarballs are also distributed in
> > bzip2 format.
> 
> Great, so we've got this compression thing covered. So we don't need  
> your new format, ever, for any reason, at all. Good to know.
> 
> >> You still have a way in, though. You have prepared _compression_
> >> support too. That is something xz embedded doesn't provide.
> >> Anyone who wants to _create_ a .xz file using bbox is potentially
> >> your client.
> > 
> > I think there is a misunderstanding here. I am not seeking
> > "clients". I am trying to be the change I wish to see in the world.
> 
> No, you're trying to make busybox be the change you see in the
> world, by leveraging the installed base of an established project to
> promote your agenda,

I know that Antonio is an organized person, but "Promote your agenda"?..
sounds like the Bilderberg group.

> and doing so _OVER_ the maintainer's objections.

Is there a guide on how to talk to the _GOD_ maintainer?.

> If the change you wish to make in the world is annoying people,
> you're doing great.
> 
> Hijacking a mailing list thread about a bug to promote an alternate  
> _incompatible_ implementation is not even potentially the same as  
> addressing the bug. It's not "look, this other code has a bug, I
> win!" That's not how it works.

The patch has been submitted on December 2012[1], but nobody seems to
listen.

[1] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2012-December/078750.html

> I've been working to replace busybox
> with toybox for years and I still occasionally submit bug reports
> (and fixes!) here.
> 

Good. So now you have an idea for the success of toybox, and be aware
if you are the author when you are proposing your program to other
maintainers.

_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox

Reply via email to