Re: Adding support for LZIP to dpkg, using that instead of xz, archive wide
* Thomas Goirand:
> As a friend puts it:
> "This is a fundamental problem/defect with xz. This (and a lot of other
> such defects, e.g. non-robustness of xz archives that easily lead to
> file corruption etc)
Corruption breaks signatures, making the file unusable, so that's not
really an issue for dpkg.
> are the reason that there is lzip (and which is why
> gnu.org has, on a technical basis, decided that lzip is official
> gzip-successor for gnu software releases when they come in tarballs).
The only GNU projects currently releasing .lz tarballs are gmp,
ddrescue, rcs, autoconf-archive, guile-sdl, ocrad, moe, gawk, ed,
gettext. Several more projects have stopped providing .lz files, but
did so in the past.
Reading <http://www.nongnu.org/lzip/lzip.html>, I see no commitment
towards convergence. In fact, the web page gives the impression that
further compression algorithms might be added in the future, breaking
your use case (“a much more elaborated way of finding coding sequences
of minimum size than the one currently used by lzip could be