From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6097 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2012 17:04:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 6084 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Nov 2012 17:04:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,TW_XZ X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:04:18 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78EBC1C6E82; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 12:04:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id liNSZosxh-kS; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 12:04:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44F561C6DCD; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 12:04:17 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7D0B4C49E9; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:04:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 17:04:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFA: handle "MiniDebuginfo" section Message-ID: <20121112170401.GU5103@adacore.com> References: <87wqxuel5k.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20121109182316.GQ5103@adacore.com> <87vcdabyf7.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87vcdabyf7.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg00294.txt.bz2 > Joel> I went to the website to see which formats it supports, and was > Joel> surprised to read: > Joel> Users of LZMA Utils should move to XZ Utils. > Joel> Shouldn't we just switch to xzutils instead? > > I think it is just the same thing with a different name. In that case, why not switch right away to xz-utils, then? Wouldn't be the case of s/lzma/xz/ with a few fixups here and there? We know we're going to have to do eventually, since lzma-utils has been obsoleted in favor of xz-utils. And if it's just a naming issue, it should be relatively easy to do? I'm just trying to save some work in the long run, but if you prefer staying with lzma-utils, then it's fine with me... -- Joel