From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18149 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2012 05:02:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 18141 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jan 2012 05:02:18 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_SUB_OBFU_Z,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; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:02:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2FD42BB47E; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:02:04 -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 t5fvPLhJhNoT; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:02:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948D72BB47D; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:02:03 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A3016145615; Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:01:51 +0400 (RET) Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:02:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Eli Zaretskii , jim@meyering.net, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: xz-compressed release tarballs? Message-ID: <20120127050151.GL31397@adacore.com> References: <87mx9a1ag4.fsf@rho.meyering.net> <20120126203148.GA30390@host2.jankratochvil.net> <83vcnyyww0.fsf@gnu.org> <20120126213612.GA4184@host2.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120126213612.GA4184@host2.jankratochvil.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-01/txt/msg00087.txt.bz2 > Current state: Shipped .tar.gz and .tar.bz2. > Possibility (a): Ship .tar.gz, .tar.bz2 and .tar.xz. > Possibility (b) - preferred by me: Ship only .tar.gz and .tar.xz. To me, it is not a question of whether tar handles .xz or not. It's a question whether the system has an xz decompresser or not (tar just calls gzip/bzip/xz as far as I can tell). The xzutils seem to be supported on quite a wide range of platforms, but I do not know whether they are now readily available. I know that on my (oldish) system, it was not installed by default. I think we can make everyone happy by simply adding the .xz format, giving us 3 release tarballs. That would cost about 25-30MB extra times 2-3 releases a year. I am not opposed to getting rid of the .bz2 format, however. -- Joel