[arch-dev-public] LZMA - in or out? ([signoff] libarchive 2.6.0) - Arch-dev-public

3 Jan 2009

      On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Andreas Radke  wrote:
...
I'd like to keep unneeded packages out of core. I see no need to move
lzma into core. We only support tar.gz for our repos. Whoever wants to
use a different format can rebuild libarchive easily.
I also wonder if our new tar package now supports lzma and lzop
compression (no tests so far). Both packages were not present when
building the tar package in he chroot. But even when it's now possible
to use these formats at runtime they should stay in extra until we may
use them for our repos.
I don't want to go too back and forth on this on the signoff thread so
I'll move it here.

I was thinking much more in the context of archives in general rather
than just pacman using libarchive. libarchive ships with bsdtar, which
I have found to be quicker than GNU tar at extracting (so I use it
nearly exclusively). It would be a shame to tell people "we don't
support .tar.lzma for anything"- that seems rather arbitrary, doesn't
it?

I too think [core] should stay as slim as possible, but when that
requires we compile our packages with a less than ideal set of
features, I want to at least give it some thought.

-Dan

[arch-dev-public] LZMA - in or out? ([signoff] libarchive 2.6.0)

Dan McGee

tags

participants (11)