"David Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It was a bit rude as written, and that's part of the problem with email in
> general. Sometimes terse statements sound worse than the intended message
> was to be delivered.
You said "nobody uses bzip2", which is CLEARLY incorrect.
> While I am really happy with the work that this free software team has been
> doing, and I appreciate and make good use of their labor, the original post
> did have a good point: why introduce a new zip scheme that would not be
> available to most people? gzip is open source and widely deployed. Was
> there a particularly strong reason for using bzip2 over gzip?
First, this is not "new". bzip2 has been around for some time.
Secondly, the source is available and it runs on a wide variety of
platforms. How is there a problem here? This is exactly how gzip is
distributed. While it's true that bzip2 is not GPL, it does meet the
DFSG.
Your question about why to use it demonstrates that you do not know
how it works, or what it does. Yet you criticise the use of it.
Perhaps why you realize how much better compression it gets than gzip,
and check out its homepage at http://www.muraroa.demon.co.uk/, you'll
see that any computer that's going to be running the JDK will probably
be of sufficient speed to benefit from bzip2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
