How is alteration from .gz to .xz going to do anything but create new upgrade
or boot issues?
what bug number is it?
-
Is lzh/ma xz built already built-in (to kernel or glibs)? What if kernel or libs changes or isn't
yet installed? Use bin?
Won't this mean all
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 08:50:20AM -0500, John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell
wrote:
> How is alteration from .gz to .xz going to do anything but create new upgrade
> or boot issues?
> what bug number is it?
Could you please mind your own business instead of spamming people?
udebs are the real
On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 17:32:49 -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 17:21, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > We could start with -z0 of course, which would be
> > supported by dpkg-dev and hence a trivial patch of debhelper would do.
> > But it doesn't gain that much.
If you mean dpkg-d
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 17:21, Philipp Kern wrote:
> Otavio,
>
> am Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 04:55:12PM -0200 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 23:14, Otavio Salvador
>> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 13:26, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> > ...
>> >> So my proposal is to switch
Otavio,
am Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 04:55:12PM -0200 hast du folgendes geschrieben:
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 23:14, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 13:26, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > ...
> >> So my proposal is to switch the udeb compression default in dpkg to xz
> >> for wheezy, when
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 23:14, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 13:26, Philipp Kern wrote:
> ...
>> So my proposal is to switch the udeb compression default in dpkg to xz
>> for wheezy, when the busybox and udpkg changes have landed. Then most
>> udebs will get a translation uploa
Philipp Kern wrote:
> True. OTOH udebs are a very restricted environment. Should I look out for
> additional dots? That might break compression formats with multiple
> components. ;-)
Why not loop until a known format or EOF is reached?
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital sign
Hi,
On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 11:17:05AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Code review:
>
> + while (fgets(buf, sizeof(buf), infp)) {
> + if (strncmp(buf, "data.tar.", 9) == 0) {
> + compression_type = buf + 9;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
>
Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >From my side you have a "go ahead" but I'd like to hear from Colin and
> Joey if they can think about any con about doing it.
No objection to the concept.
Code review:
+ while (fgets(buf, sizeof(buf), infp)) {
+ if (strncmp(buf, "data.tar.", 9) == 0
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 13:26, Philipp Kern wrote:
...
> So my proposal is to switch the udeb compression default in dpkg to xz
> for wheezy, when the busybox and udpkg changes have landed. Then most
> udebs will get a translation upload anyway, if not they can be binNMUed
> to pick up the right
Hi there,
last week I played around with xz compression and evaluated how d-i
could benefit from it. It turns out that we could go from a total udeb
size (on amd64) of 50 MB to 40 MB just by applying xz -0e compression
instead of the default gzip.
To achieve that you need UNXZ support in busybox
11 matches
Mail list logo
