On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Jim Meyering j...@meyering.net wrote:
Paul Eggert wrote:
On 12/15/2012 05:54 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
FYI, a couple of weeks ago, Aki Helin exposed still more problems in
gzip's unpacking code.
Well, to be fair, I also have a similar problem with 'tar'
in my
Jeffrey Walton wrote:
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Jim Meyering j...@meyering.net wrote:
Paul Eggert wrote:
On 12/15/2012 05:54 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
FYI, a couple of weeks ago, Aki Helin exposed still more problems in
gzip's unpacking code.
Well, to be fair, I also have a similar
Jim Meyering wrote:
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
On 2 March 2012 06:45, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69; if
this would be a hardship for you, and you need the .gz or .bz2 release,
On 12/15/2012 05:54 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
FYI, a couple of weeks ago, Aki Helin exposed still more problems in
gzip's unpacking code.
Well, to be fair, I also have a similar problem with 'tar'
in my inbox, from Aki, but I'm not inclined to suggest that
we stop using 'tar'
Paul Eggert wrote:
On 12/15/2012 05:54 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
FYI, a couple of weeks ago, Aki Helin exposed still more problems in
gzip's unpacking code.
Well, to be fair, I also have a similar problem with 'tar'
in my inbox, from Aki, but I'm not inclined to suggest that
we stop using
Marko Lindqvist wrote:
On 2 March 2012 06:45, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69; if
this would be a hardship for you, and you need the .gz or .bz2 release,
please speak up now.
I just encountered new argument for
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
On 2 March 2012 06:45, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69; if
this would be a hardship for you, and you need the .gz or .bz2 release,
please speak up now.
On Sat, 8 Dec 2012, Jim Meyering wrote:
I just encountered new argument for providing .gz of autoconf also in
the future.
There is no tangible benefit offered to the world by removing the
gzip-compressed autoconf package. Xz is excessively complex,
excessively large, and has limited
On 8 December 2012 23:01, Jim Meyering j...@meyering.net wrote:
Marko Lindqvist wrote:
On 2 March 2012 06:45, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69; if
this would be a hardship for you, and you need the .gz or .bz2 release,
On 11/24/2012 09:16 AM, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
On 2 March 2012 06:45, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69; if
this would be a hardship for you, and you need the .gz or .bz2 release,
please speak up now.
I just encountered
On 24 November 2012 10:58, Stefano Lattarini
stefano.lattar...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/24/2012 09:16 AM, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
On 2 March 2012 06:45, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69; if
this would be a hardship for you,
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
On 2 March 2012 06:45, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69; if
this would be a hardship for you, and you need the .gz or .bz2 release,
please speak up now.
I just encountered new
12 matches
Mail list logo
