Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 16 Feb 2010 07:29:04 -0800 | From | "J.H." <> | Subject | Re: [kernel.org users] XZ Migration discussion |
| |
On 02/15/2010 07:15 AM, tytso@mit.edu wrote: > On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 08:08:03PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 18:07:24 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>>> As a matter of fact, I am advocating the use of xz while I don't have >>>> it installed on most of my machines. I really don't see this as a >>>> blocker. >>> >>> Eh? >>> >>> Making many people around the world install uncommon tool is not >>> something that should be done lightly. >> >> It's pretty obvious that xz will become popular quickly, at least on >> Linux and BSD systems, much like bz2 is today. I'm not asking people to >> start using ClearCase ;) xz will supersede bz2, it's only a matter of >> time. I see no problem in being one of the early adopters. > > If by "quickly" you mean 'ten years', sure, maybe. Keep in mind that > there are people where who are still using RHEL 3, and some of them > might want to download from ftp.kernel.org. So those people who are > suggesting that we replace .gz files with .xz on kernel.org are > *really* smoking something good. > > People who think xz are good should be working to get it installed by > default into the community and then enterprise distro's, first.... > > - Ted
As a note xz is available via EPEL for Redhat Enterprice Linux 5 and anything that's derived from that. Doesn't seem to be available, directly, for 4 or lower. Not sure on Suse, and Debian's already been mentioned. Just trying to do a quick survey of what's out there already.
- John 'Warthog9' Hawley
| |