status of forked zlibs in rsync and zsync

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On 09/16/2009 06:43 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 11:32 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote:
>> Looking through the mailing list archives, as far as I can tell, noone
>> has tried this course of action yet:
>>
>> 1) Ask zlib upstream to accept the changes that the rsync devs made to
>> zlib and issue a new release
>> 2) Ask rsync upstream to support the new version of zlib
>> 3) Ask zsync upstream to support the new version of zlib
>>
>> Surely that's the right solution, and the first thing that should be
>> tried?
> 
> My recollection is that 1 was tried and upstream said no.

This was tried by upstream rsync.

> So 2,3 became
> moot.
> 
This is a logical leap.  rsync has forked zlib but they are only using
the fork internally.  2 and 3 get that fork out in the open so that more
than one program can use it.  2 and 3 are solutions when solution 1
fails.  Since solution 1 has failed, 2 and 3 become *relevant*, not moot.

-Toshio

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090916/3858e993/attachment.sig>