On Tue, 14 Sep 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 05:02:42PM CEST:
This sort of decision-making results in people feeling that GNU
software is excessively complex bloatware. Personal politics and
status has become more important than proper technical a
Hello Bob,
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 05:02:42PM CEST:
> This sort of decision-making results in people feeling that GNU
> software is excessively complex bloatware. Personal politics and
> status has become more important than proper technical analysis.
This is fairly grave
* Charles Wilson wrote on Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 07:14:06PM CEST:
> If you want to start an xz-vs-lzip fight, propose the appropriate
> support for dist-lzip on automake-patches and fight it there. :-)
git Automake has dist-lzip support.
lzma/xz support was added at the time it was because somebody
On 9/14/2010 11:02 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>>
>> No objections.
>>
>> I'm curious to know what the history of lzma and xz is that makes this
>> desirable though.
>
> I am curious to know if XZ Utils has now achieved a proper stable
> release or if i
On Tue, 14 Sep 2010, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
No objections.
I'm curious to know what the history of lzma and xz is that makes this
desirable though.
I am curious to know if XZ Utils has now achieved a proper stable
release or if it will be perpetually in a prototype like state. Its
code is
On 09/14/2010 07:58 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
* configure.ac (AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE): Prefer better file format.
* Makefile.maint (git-release, git-dist, prev-tarball)
(new-tarball, diffs): Use correct extension.
* HACKING: Update instructions.
Hmm - I mentioned it in ChangeLog, but hadn't yet saved the
* configure.ac (AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE): Prefer better file format.
* Makefile.maint (git-release, git-dist, prev-tarball)
(new-tarball, diffs): Use correct extension.
* HACKING: Update instructions.
* .gitignore: Ignore .xz files.
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake
---
> > I'm fine with, if you also adjust HA
On 9/14/2010 2:04 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> I'm curious to know what the history of lzma and xz is that makes this
> desirable though.
Here's some documentation I put together for the cygwin xz package:
xz
This package pr
On 14 Sep 2010, at 11:58, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> * Eric Blake wrote on Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 11:34:23PM CEST:
>> * configure.ac (AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE): Prefer better file format.
>
>> Any objections to this patch? xz is a more robust successor to lzma.
>
> I'm fine with, if you also a
Hi Eric,
* Eric Blake wrote on Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 11:34:23PM CEST:
> * configure.ac (AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE): Prefer better file format.
> Any objections to this patch? xz is a more robust successor to lzma.
I'm fine with, if you also adjust HACKING, .gitignore, Makefile.maint.
We require new-enoug
* configure.ac (AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE): Prefer better file format.
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake
---
Any objections to this patch? xz is a more robust successor to lzma.
ChangeLog|5 +
configure.ac |2 +-
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ChangeLog b/Change
11 matches
Mail list logo