On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 09:56:39PM +0000, Alexander Koch wrote:
> On Mon, 18 October 1999 13:15:36 -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> > On Oct 18, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > Another possibility would be someone adding bzip2 support to dpkg et al,
> > > and having .orig.tar.bz2's, and data.tar.bz2. (This actually doesn't look
> > > like it'd be all /that/ difficult, either, just a matter of conditionally
> > > using /usr/bin/bzip2 instead of /bin/gzip. Hmmm.)
> > There's a pending policy proposal to permit the use of bz2 source
> > packages and diffs. I think dpkg-source is a bit ugly, but it
> > probably wouldn't be too hard for a perl hacker (i.e. not me) to add
> > the support.
> Now, who of the ones that *can* change policy is going to do
> anything on it? Please, can some of those give the many of
> us an idea of what is the problem or (possibly) what I am
> getting wrong?
(a) There's not much point changing policy when the code's not written.
(b) IIRC the policy proposal *requires* .bz2 compression for all sources,
rather than just allowing it, which isn't ideal.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it
results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
-- Linus Torvalds
Attachment:
pgpop0TyQoLNI.pgp
Description: PGP signature