[arch-general] Adopt tar.xz for official repo packaging ?

Nathan K. Bathory kumyco at kh.nu
Fri Jul 3 09:28:22 EDT 2009

On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 09:24:32 -0400
Andrei Thorp <garoth at gmail.com> wrote:

> Excerpts from b4283's message of Fri Jul 03 06:32:14 -0400 2009:
> > i guess one of the major concerns is that tar & gzip is more common
> > than xz. but since GNU is also packing their coreutils in xz packs,
> > i guess that a good time to switch?
> Well, one nice thing about being a distro is that you have some
> ability to choose what stuff the users will have on their computers :)
> And you really raise a solid argument in my view. That's like half the
> size!
> Does compression/decompression take longer? Are there any other bad
> parts to using this compression algorithm that are worth mentioning
> aside from lack of popularity?
> (Note, isn't even bzip better at filesize than gzip?)

read through the archived posts, i'm sure this was discussed already ..
iirc the issue was with implementing this in libarchive and some
licensing issues.

More information about the arch-general mailing list