[Top][All Lists]

[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: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 20:08:54 -0500

On Fri, 02 Mar 2012 16:48:07 -0700
Warren Young <address@hidden> wrote:

> I still use systems[*] that don't have tar -J, and am likely to
> continue doing so for many years to come.  Installing xz isn't a big
> deal, but typing the longer commands needed for separate
> decompression and untarring is.

Exactly.  And learning yet another unizipping command line is not now
and never will be worth my time.  It might become necessary, but that's
another story.  

There are other tars and other paxes.  I use NetBSD pax.  It doesn't
support xz and likely won't until and unless it becomes the dominant
format.  Is it GNU's prerogative to force changes like this, and to
make other free software less convenient to use?  

If you live, and autoconf developers do, at the cutting edge of new
releases, you of course know about xz.  I had to resort to google and
wikipedia to even know what it was, because the site whose tarball I
needed didn't even bother to note what it was.  (Note that it's still
pretty common for websites to explain what a .pdf is, and where to
download the Acrobat Reader.)  


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]