Re: Switching default dpkg-deb compressor to xz
On Mon, 2013-05-13 at 21:53 -0400, John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell
wrote:
> I'm complaining.
>
> Why are you fixing something that isn't broken and isn't an issue ?
It's not broken, but there is an issue: it's getting hard to fit a
generally useful set of packages and tasks on CD#1, and xz compression
would make this easier. In general, xz can achieve substantially better
compression ratios than gzip, with little extra cost in decompression
time.
> Are you trying to cause problems with free software?
> Are you playing favorites?
What basis do you have for making such accusations?
> It's too new to say if it has no long term problems (ie, such as
> support issues).
xz has been supported in Debian for some time, with no problems that I'm
aware of.
> How is shipping (ie kernel) in all three of .gz, and .bz2,
> and in .xz saving anyone on either size any time or effort?
> It isn't.
Er... kernel.org does that, not Debian.
Ben.
> I still think Compress is all the rage and the best of
> end all solutions :)
>
>
> Guillem Jover wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > As mentioned some months ago [0], I'm planning to switch dpkg-deb default
> > compressor from gzip to xz, as there seemed to be consensus that was
>
>
--
Ben Hutchings
Make three consecutive correct guesses and you will be considered an expert.
Reply to: