Your message dated Sat, 2 Jan 2010 01:31:43 -0600
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: dpkg: please change pre-dependency to lzma | xz-lzma
has caused the Debian Bug report #542149,
regarding dpkg: please change pre-dependency to lzma | xz-lzma
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
542149: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=542149
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.15.3.1
Severity: wishlist
I have been working on packaging XZ Utils, which is supposed to
eventually supersede LZMA Utils. To that end, it provides “lzma”,
“unlzma”, etc commands for compatibility with lzma, but scripts and
other programs are encouraged to use “xz” directly when possible.
Would it be possible for dpkg to detect whether xz is on the $PATH,
and if so, use that instead of lzma?
The motivation is the following:
* Some users may want to install XZ Utils without the legacy commands
(by installing xz-utils but not xz-lzma nor lzma). dpkg should still
work for such users.
* Without this change, switching between lzma and xz-lzma is
impossible, since it requires being without the pseudo-essential
package lzma for a few moments. With this change, switching between
lzma and xz-lzma would work fine as long as xz-utils is installed.
Note that the version of xz-utils in experimental is not split into
xz-utils and xz-lzma yet. If you would like a split version to try
out, please let me know. For just xz-utils without the lzma
compatibility commands, see
<http://collab-maint.alioth.debian.org/xz-utils/>.
Regards,
Jonathan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Guillem Jover wrote:
> Switching the support from lzma to xz has been on my radar for some
> time, but given that the tools and library in unstable didn't seem to
> be ready, and the ones which seemed to were in experimental, I had not
> yet looked into writting the code.
I'll write a little more again soon about using liblzma in dpkg (sorry
for the messy patch series before). I have no plan to switch to
Pre-Depends: xz-utils | lzma or similar, so closing this bug.
Thanks,
Jonathan
--- End Message ---
