On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Eric Blake wrote: The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69;
What problem are y'all trying to solve here? Is gnu.org running out of disk space or bandwidth?
I hope you're not just trying to save disk space. I did a little math here and it looks like xz might save you 5 months of waiting for disk prices to drop. Same $/GiB either way.
A better argument is the one behind RPM moving to xz: so they can keep adding bigger and more packages without moving to a second DVD. But, I don't see that applying to gnu.org.
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.
[*] The one likely to cause me the most problems is CentOS 5, replaced only about a year ago, which will still be receiving bug fixes for another 5 years. Given that we still have CentOS 3 boxes in service despite the OS being EOL'd more than a year ago, I'd say I'm going to be without tar -J everywhere until the third tech bubble hits in ~2019, assuming Wall Street keeps the current schedule.
OS X Lion, released not that long ago, lacks gnutar -J, too. Apple being Apple, Lions will probably be endangered way before 2019, but still...
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
