[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency
From: |
James K. Lowden |
Subject: |
Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency |
Date: |
Sat, 3 Mar 2012 17:38:13 -0500 |
On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:48:31 -0500
Mike Frysinger <address@hidden> wrote:
> if you
> want to be lazy and have one command that handles arbitrary
> compression/archiving, then use a project that does exactly that.
It's not me I'm suggesting you satisfy, Mike.
You can make all the hard-edged, insulting retorts you want to. You
get only one more to me, though, because I'm done making my point: that
the current mania for xz ignores the utility and convenience of gz. No
amount of architectural conviction on your part changes that, not for
me, and not for anyone else.
--jkl
Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, James K. Lowden, 2012/03/02
- Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, Mike Frysinger, 2012/03/02
- Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, James K. Lowden, 2012/03/03
- Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, Mike Frysinger, 2012/03/03
- Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, James K. Lowden, 2012/03/03
- Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, Mike Frysinger, 2012/03/03
- Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency,
James K. Lowden <=
Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, Warren Young, 2012/03/06
Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, Alberto Luaces, 2012/03/06
Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, Olaf Lenz, 2012/03/06
Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, Warren Young, 2012/03/06
Re: Autoconf distributions and xz dependency, Werner LEMBERG, 2012/03/06