On 19/03/11 12:25, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
On 19/03/11 11:19, Olav Vitters wrote:
As a pre-warning, could you please ask the ftp-masters again to support
.xz?
They have included this item in their agenda for the meeting. I've told them
that GNOME plans to switch to .xz soon and that
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 05:12:22PM +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
So I'd say .xz support will be in place in ~ 1 or 2 months. Definitely for
GNOME
3.2, but hopefully way sooner.
Great! Then I'll first everything from .tar.gz + .tar.bz2 to .tar.bz2 +
.tar.xz as transition. Then before
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:42:01PM +, Ghee Teo wrote:
On 21/03/2011 12:29, Olav Vitters wrote:
I'd like to
understand what the impact would be. So, whom would it affect (what kind
of groups: users/developers/OS team/something else)?
There are 2 aspect of these I can see at least:
On 22/03/2011 13:05, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:42:01PM +, Ghee Teo wrote:
On 21/03/2011 12:29, Olav Vitters wrote:
I'd like to
understand what the impact would be. So, whom would it affect (what kind
of groups: users/developers/OS team/something else)?
There are 2
I hope this does not imply or infer that all the source tarball for
GNOME will be uploaded in .xz format only. Solaris is *not* supporting
.xz by default yet. This means, anyone who want to compile source code
modules will have difficulties.
Just want to clarify.
-Ghee
On 19/03/2011 11:19,
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 09:55:05AM +, Ghee Teo wrote:
I hope this does not imply or infer that all the source tarball for
GNOME will be uploaded in .xz format only. Solaris is *not*
supporting .xz by default yet. This means, anyone who want to
compile source code modules will have
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:29:56PM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 09:55:05AM +, Ghee Teo wrote:
I hope this does not imply or infer that all the source tarball for
GNOME will be uploaded in .xz format only. Solaris is *not*
supporting .xz by default yet. This means,
Hello Olav,
What is the reasoning behind this move? Just storage savings? It seems
to me that it will actually be easier to request our sponsors
(RedHat/Novell/Oracle...) for more storage than pushing everyone into
the pain of having to deal with such unfamiliar format. We are
releasing .gz and
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 09:21, Alberto Ruiz ar...@gnome.org wrote:
Hello Olav,
What is the reasoning behind this move? Just storage savings? It seems
to me that it will actually be easier to request our sponsors
(RedHat/Novell/Oracle...) for more storage than pushing everyone into
the pain
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:21:38PM +, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
What is the reasoning behind this move? Just storage savings? It seems
For xz:
1) Much faster download
2) Much smaller
3) Doesn't use a lot of memory when decompressing (9MB)
4) Uncompress speed seems similar to bz2 (as in: don't
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:52:17PM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
But mostly:
Forgot my blue sky idea that I've almost completed:
I'm working on automatically giving maintainers access to upload things
to ftp.gnome.org. Then we'd be able to give way more people the ability
to upload tarballs
Sorry Olav,
I thought this is actually going to happen soon and the decision was
set in stone.
2011/3/21 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:21:38PM +, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
to me that it will actually be easier to request our sponsors
(RedHat/Novell/Oracle...) for more
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:10:58PM +, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
2011/3/21 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl:
Could you expand on the pain?
Basically most distros won't ship it by default, at least not for now.
Solaris/RHEL/SLED/CentOS are probably the worst cases here. But also
custom
On 21/03/2011 12:29, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 09:55:05AM +, Ghee Teo wrote:
I hope this does not imply or infer that all the source tarball for
GNOME will be uploaded in .xz format only. Solaris is *not*
supporting .xz by default yet. This means, anyone who want to
On 21/03/11 15:29, Olav Vitters wrote:
ATM I really like to switch to the new script (ftpadmin) before 3.0 as
it correctly handles NEWS files and .0 releases..
\o/
That always annoyed me. Thanks!
Emilio
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:42 AM, Ghee Teo ghee@oracle.com wrote:
On 21/03/2011 12:29, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 09:55:05AM +, Ghee Teo wrote:
I hope this does not imply or infer that all the source tarball for
GNOME will be uploaded in .xz format only. Solaris is
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 5:50 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
Currently working on redesigning a new master.gnome.org[1][4].
While I know there are still tar file consumers, the most important
task in my mind is ensuring consistency among releases in terms of:
1) Having a git tag for the
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Ghee Teo ghee@oracle.com wrote:
On 21/03/2011 17:02, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:42 AM, Ghee Teoghee@oracle.com wrote:
On 21/03/2011 12:29, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 09:55:05AM +, Ghee Teo wrote:
I hope
On 21/03/2011 17:02, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:42 AM, Ghee Teoghee@oracle.com wrote:
On 21/03/2011 12:29, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 09:55:05AM +, Ghee Teo wrote:
I hope this does not imply or infer that all the source tarball for
GNOME will be
On 21/03/2011 17:27, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Ghee Teoghee@oracle.com wrote:
On 21/03/2011 17:02, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:42 AM, Ghee Teoghee@oracle.comwrote:
On 21/03/2011 12:29, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 08:45:31AM -0700, Baybal Ni wrote:
What is xz?
It is a different way to compress files.
See http://tukaani.org/xz/
You have various method to compress a file. Commonly used ones are .gz
and .bz2. Then there was .lzma shortly, but it has been superseded by
.xz.
The
Note: breaking thread on purpose.
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 04:31:23PM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 03:15:34PM +, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
From a Debian POV, we can't upload .xz upstream tarballs yet (dpkg supports
it,
but the ftp-masters don't allow it),
On 19/03/11 11:19, Olav Vitters wrote:
Note: breaking thread on purpose.
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 04:31:23PM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 03:15:34PM +, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
From a Debian POV, we can't upload .xz upstream tarballs yet (dpkg supports
it,
2011/3/19 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org:
On 19/03/11 11:19, Olav Vitters wrote:
Note: breaking thread on purpose.
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 04:31:23PM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 03:15:34PM +, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
From a Debian POV, we can't upload
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 03:55:18PM +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:
2011/3/19 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort po...@debian.org:
On 19/03/11 11:19, Olav Vitters wrote:
As a pre-warning, could you please ask the ftp-masters again to support
.xz?
They have included this item in their agenda for the
Currently working on redesigning a new master.gnome.org[1][4].
As part of this, I'd like some quick thoughts on:
- diff/delta files between versions
- gzip/bz2/lzma compression; lzma only?
Note:
I know most in Europe/USA will have a fast internet connection. I'd like
to see if there is a real
Hey,
Le mercredi 02 mars 2011, à 11:50 +0100, Olav Vitters a écrit :
== A. diff/delta files between versions ==
I don't know of anybody using this to update from a tarball to a newer
one. However, I guess some people use this to quickly see what has
changed between the two tarballs. I don't
Vincent Untz wrote:
I believe that Debian still uses .gz for the upstream tarball, and at
least in openSUSE, we generally use .bz2 for upstream tarballs (I guess
it's okay to switch to lzma for openSUSE, though).
With the new source format (3.0) Debian nowadays supports .bz2, and
could
2011/3/2 Frederic Peters fpet...@gnome.org:
Vincent Untz wrote:
I believe that Debian still uses .gz for the upstream tarball, and at
least in openSUSE, we generally use .bz2 for upstream tarballs (I guess
it's okay to switch to lzma for openSUSE, though).
With the new source format (3.0)
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:17:38PM +0100, Frederic Peters wrote:
Vincent Untz wrote:
I believe that Debian still uses .gz for the upstream tarball, and at
least in openSUSE, we generally use .bz2 for upstream tarballs (I guess
it's okay to switch to lzma for openSUSE, though).
With the
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:10:09PM +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Conversion might take a while on master.gnome.org, but seems
manageable. Not sure if I can easily combine lzma and xdelta3.
Hrm, I wouldn't change past releases. Just leave them the way they are;
it shouldn't hurt.
Oh,
Le mercredi 02 mars 2011, à 12:47 +0100, Olav Vitters a écrit :
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:10:09PM +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Conversion might take a while on master.gnome.org, but seems
manageable. Not sure if I can easily combine lzma and xdelta3.
Hrm, I wouldn't change past
On 2 March 2011 11:30, Frederic Crozat f...@crozat.net wrote:
I'd say let's stick to .bz2 only for now.
Makes sense to me. Fedora certainly uses .bz2 in preference to .gz.
Richard.
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Olav Vitters wrote:
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:17:38PM +0100, Frederic Peters wrote:
Vincent Untz wrote:
I believe that Debian still uses .gz for the upstream tarball, and at
least in openSUSE, we generally use .bz2 for upstream tarballs (I guess
it's okay to switch to lzma for
On 2 March 2011 11:57, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote:
First step: kindly ask maintainers to use dist-lzma in AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE
;-)
I think would be better dist-xz instead, as xz displaced the lzma
format some time ago [1]
[1]
On 2011-03-02 13:46, Javier Jardón jjar...@gnome.org wrote:
On 2 March 2011 11:57, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote:
First step: kindly ask maintainers to use dist-lzma in AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE
;-)
I think would be better dist-xz instead, as xz displaced the lzma
format some time ago [1]
[1]
On 2 March 2011 14:01, David King dav...@openismus.com wrote:
On 2011-03-02 13:46, Javier Jardón jjar...@gnome.org wrote:
I think would be better dist-xz instead, as xz displaced the lzma
format some time ago [1]
This seems like another good reason to push the (proposed) autotools
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 02:13:21PM +, Javier Jardón wrote:
On 2 March 2011 14:01, David King dav...@openismus.com wrote:
On 2011-03-02 13:46, Javier Jardón jjar...@gnome.org wrote:
I think would be better dist-xz instead, as xz displaced the lzma
format some time ago [1]
This
Hi,
On 02/03/11 10:50, Olav Vitters wrote:
- gzip/bz2/lzma compression; lzma only?
As has been said:
lzma is deprecated in favor of xz, so it should be gzip/bz2/xz. There's no point
in going to lzma anymore.
From a Debian POV, we can't upload .xz upstream tarballs yet (dpkg supports it,
but
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 03:15:34PM +, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
From a Debian POV, we can't upload .xz upstream tarballs yet (dpkg supports
it,
but the ftp-masters don't allow it), though most likely that will change soon.
Could you ask when they'd allow that? And please mention we're
On 03/02/2011 04:44 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 2 March 2011 11:30, Frederic Crozatf...@crozat.net wrote:
I'd say let's stick to .bz2 only for now.
Makes sense to me. Fedora certainly uses .bz2 in preference to .gz.
True, but Fedora also prefers .xz over .bz2.
Currently, for Fedora
On 03/02/11 09:13, Javier Jardón wrote:
http://live.gnome.org/GnomeGoals/ModernAutotools
at least once someone adds the dist-xz suggestion to that page. ;)
Done :)
BTW, any objection to change the status of this from propossed to an
approved GnomeGoal?
There are several objections
quote who=Vincent Untz
Some apps also have an icon installed in there basedir. How to get that
there?
No idea.
You can just copy one in. They were used for planet.gnome.org/news and were
intended to be used for other automated things (ie. based on tarball name,
you can reliably get an
Ar Iau, Maw 20, 2008 am 02:51:09PM +0100, ysgrifennodd Vincent Untz:
Le jeudi 20 mars 2008, à 14:41 +0100, Stefan Kost a écrit :
Some apps also have an icon installed in there basedir. How to get that
there?
No idea.
Any reason people can't just put it there?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ssh
On 3/21/08, daniel g. siegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Do, 2008-03-20 at 22:39 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 05:33:38PM -0400, Andrew Cowie wrote:
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 22:26 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
- checking of sane versions (no 'rc1' 'beta1' etc)
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 4:06 AM, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le jeudi 20 mars 2008, à 22:27 -0400, Andrew Cowie a écrit :
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 22:39 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
There is no reliable way to determine
the latest versions.
You said you'd be working in
hej,
one question for 'install-module foo-X.Y.tar.gz' on master.gnome.org.
Does anyone knows how to handle 'foo-X.Y.news' and 'foo-X.Y.changes'?
Some modules have those files in the ftp directories and it improves
the generated newsfeed on http://download.gnome.org/LATEST.xml.
Some apps
Le jeudi 20 mars 2008, à 14:41 +0100, Stefan Kost a écrit :
hej,
one question for 'install-module foo-X.Y.tar.gz' on master.gnome.org.
Does anyone knows how to handle 'foo-X.Y.news' and 'foo-X.Y.changes'?
Some modules have those files in the ftp directories and it improves
the
Hi,
Vincent Untz schrieb:
Le jeudi 20 mars 2008, à 14:41 +0100, Stefan Kost a écrit :
hej,
one question for 'install-module foo-X.Y.tar.gz' on master.gnome.org.
Does anyone knows how to handle 'foo-X.Y.news' and 'foo-X.Y.changes'?
Some modules have those files in the ftp directories and
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:54:41PM +0200, Stefan Kost wrote:
Vincent Untz schrieb:
Le jeudi 20 mars 2008, à 14:41 +0100, Stefan Kost a écrit :
hej,
one question for 'install-module foo-X.Y.tar.gz' on master.gnome.org.
Does anyone knows how to handle 'foo-X.Y.news' and
Hi,
Olav Vitters schrieb:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:54:41PM +0200, Stefan Kost wrote:
Vincent Untz schrieb:
Le jeudi 20 mars 2008, à 14:41 +0100, Stefan Kost a écrit :
hej,
one question for 'install-module foo-X.Y.tar.gz' on master.gnome.org.
Does anyone knows how to handle
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 11:13:05PM +0200, Stefan Kost wrote:
Install-module is not the only place where x.y.z is expected. I'm
planning to rewrite install-module in Python and hopefully I can add
something that handles the .0 case; together with .exe files.
Note that it will be much
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 22:26 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
- checking of sane versions (no 'rc1' 'beta1' etc)
Why not? If a project wants to do that, that's their business.
AfC
Toronto
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 05:33:38PM -0400, Andrew Cowie wrote:
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 22:26 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
- checking of sane versions (no 'rc1' 'beta1' etc)
Why not? If a project wants to do that, that's their business.
Because it confuses the ordering. There is no reliable
On Do, 2008-03-20 at 22:39 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 05:33:38PM -0400, Andrew Cowie wrote:
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 22:26 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
- checking of sane versions (no 'rc1' 'beta1' etc)
Why not? If a project wants to do that, that's their
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 22:39 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
There is no reliable way to determine
the latest versions.
You said you'd be working in Python; the Gentoo linux people have some
excellent ordering algorithms embodied in Portage. I can ask around to
find out the particular code to look
56 matches
Mail list logo
