Bug#592300: future unblock: xz-utils/5.0.0
Julien Cristau wrote:
> What's up with this? Do we still need more updates in squeeze?
I would like to upload version 4.999.9beta+20100927-1 to unstable.
Changes since 20100810 (testing):
* New snapshot, taken from upstream commit cec0ddc.
- liblzma: The meaning of --extreme has been tweaked to address
cases in which it made the compression ratio worse. Some files
might benefit slightly less from --extreme.
- xz: Table columns are not misaligned any more in messages with
multi-byte characters (e.g., file sizes with LANG=fi_FI.UTF-8).
- xz: New German and Italian translations.
- Various documentation, message, and translation updates.
* Update copyright file.
* debian/rules get-orig-source: Update upstream Git URL.
* xz-utils/README.Debian: Advertise XZ_DEFAULTS.
* New snapshot, taken from upstream commit 373ee26.
- liblzma: The settings for compression levels 0 through 5
(used by xz -0/.../-5) have been tweaked. This affects the
speed, compression ratio, and memory usage at compression and
decompression time.
- Does not search so hard for a match when a low "nice match
length" setting is specified without a depth.
- xz: The -1/.../-9 preset options override any previously
specified filters, rather than vice versa. To mix presets
with filter options, use the --lzma2=preset=n option.
- xz: Warns about --memlimit-compress settings that result in
compression settings changing even if no explicit -1/.../-9,
--lzma1, or --lzma2 option was used.
- "xz -v -v --compress" now prints an estimate of the memory
required to decompress a file.
* debian/copyright: Update upstream Git URL.
* debian/changelog.upstream.sh: Permit terser changelog lines.
* Standards-Version: 3.9.1 (checked).
You can find it (targetted at experimental) at
git://git.debian.org/collab-maint/xz.git experimental
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xz-utils/xz-utils_4.999.9beta+20100927-1.dsc
The documentation is up to date now, so I would have no reservations
about including it in squeeze.
What do you think?
Jonathan
Reply to: