This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Steering committee, please, consider using lzip instead of xz
- From: Antonio Diaz Diaz <antonio at gnu dot org>
- To: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Cc: Matias Fonzo <selk at dragora dot org>, Antonio Diaz Diaz <antonio at gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2017 10:56:38 +0200
- Subject: Re: Steering committee, please, consider using lzip instead of xz
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20170607211016.19aac8af@rafaela> <CAFiYyc2v-hdDPQyHg=RQFs67i64kRe9Dwq6htJFvtLpQhRfh_w@mail.gmail.com>
Richard Biener wrote:
While openSUSE has it, SLES does not. tar support seems to be
via calling the external lzip tool (failing if that is not available).
You mean SUSE Linux Enterprise Server is using a format that does not
guarantee safe interoperability among implementations to "power
The decision to use xz was largely due to availability. If we use lzip
and 80% of the users have to fall back to the .gz tarball that would
For the case of SLES I would say that avoiding xz is a must. IMHO
SLES users are better served by falling back to the .gz tarball until
the next major version of SLES is released than by suffering xz forever.
"SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12 is a highly reliable, scalable and
secure server operating system".