Daniel Veillard wrote: > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:57:40AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: >> Daniel Veillard wrote: >> > Hum, I realize that support of LZOP was added after 0.7.0, so we never >> > made a release with it (well except for git snapshot which may have been >> > pushed). >> > I wonder if the best is not to just drop the lzop option altogether >> > and stick xz as a package dependancy until we have found a way to >> > provide at the API level which compression options are actually >> > available. >> > >> > Opinions ? >> >> Dropping lzop sounds good. It seems lzop is not very popular. >> We don't need that many choices. >> >> Maybe even nuke lzma too before we're stuck with it forever. >> Technically, we can do that, since it was added only a month ago, >> also after 0.7.0: >> >> v0.7.0-35-g2d6a581 > > Actually om my machine here lzma is provided as a backward compat option > by xz, so yes I'm inclined to remove that option too: > > aphio:~ -> which lzma > /usr/bin/lzma > paphio:~ -> rpm -qf /usr/bin/lzma > xz-lzma-compat-4.999.8-0.8.beta.20090817git.fc11.x86_64 > > I will post a patch later, FYI, xz can decompress lzma-compressed input: $ echo foooo |lzma -c|xz -dc foooo so libvirt won't need the "lzma" command, as long as xz is available. -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list