Re: Adding support for LZIP to dpkg, using that instead of xz, archive wide
On 06/15/2015 05:04 AM, Guillem Jover wrote:
> In addition lzip seems to be
> substantially slower (at least) when compressing compared to xz using the
> same preset levels.
I understand that some may care about it, but as for me, I couldn't care
less about the time taken for compressing. What I need is
reproducibility. Right now, I'm switching back to .gz, which is
disappointing.
Thomas
Reply to:
- References:
- Adding support for LZIP to dpkg, using that instead of xz, archive wide
- From: Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org>
- Re: Adding support for LZIP to dpkg, using that instead of xz, archive wide
- From: Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org>
- Re: Adding support for LZIP to dpkg, using that instead of xz, archive wide
- From: Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org>
- Re: Adding support for LZIP to dpkg, using that instead of xz, archive wide
- From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>
- Re: Adding support for LZIP to dpkg, using that instead of xz, archive wide
- From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>
- Re: Adding support for LZIP to dpkg, using that instead of xz, archive wide
- From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>