> On 2 April 2014 21:46, drago01 <drago01@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> ** possibly adjust spec files to require or build-require lbzip2 instead > >>> of > >>> bzip2. > >> Is this necessary? Wouldn't it be better to have lbzip2 Provide bzip2 > >> or something so that updating all those packages is not necessary, > >> and also that people who prefer normal bzip2 can still use it? > > > > Why would people prefer it? If it is the same but slower? > > Yes, if it's interface compatible then it's pretty nice. Multithreaded > compression is handy from time to time. Pity about no library > interface (lbzip2 might be an unfortunate name choice...), > particularly for things like perl and python. I suppose from the pov > of minimal systems it might be nice to not have to have both if you > need to fulfil both a bzip2 library requirement and a bzip2 > requirement, but that's a very particular case for a few kB saving. It shouldn't be difficult to provide library interface. In fact I considered planned it from the very beginning, but then lacked motivation. I'm sure that accepting this Change will be a motivator good enough for me to finally do this. -- Mikolaj Izdebski -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
