[Bug 506339] Review Request: XZ Utils - LZMA Utils with newer file format

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506339


Milos Jakubicek <xjakub at fi.muni.cz> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |jgranado at redhat.com,
                   |                            |ville.skytta at iki.fi,
                   |                            |xjakub at fi.muni.cz
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |xjakub at fi.muni.cz
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




--- Comment #1 from Milos Jakubicek <xjakub at fi.muni.cz>  2009-06-16 16:01:21 EDT ---
We have to decide how this package will work together with the current lzma.
There was already a brief discussion regarding this issue with Ville Skyttä and
Joel Granados (cc'ed, input welcome).

I'm pasting an e-mail summary:

"
On Wednesday 10 June 2009, Joel Granados wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 07:37:10PM +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
>> > > On Tuesday 09 June 2009, Joel Granados wrote:
>>> > > > Hello Ville.
>> > >
>> > > Hello Joel,
>> > >
>>> > > > I'm Joel and I maintain parted for fedora.  parted upstream started
>>> > > > using XZ for its build tests and it is needed in fedora, at least for
>>> > > > parted.  I asked in #fedora-devel about XZ in fedora and I was told
>>> > > > that you were looking into packaging it.
>>> > > > Do you have a spec file proposal?  How far along are you in the
>>> > > > packaging process? Is there something I can help you with?  Why have
>>> > > > you not posted the package on the review queue?.... I think, in
>>> > > > general, I want to know the status on the packaging effort.
>> > >
>> > > I did put together an initial package of xz, unfortunately without
>> > > realizing
> >
> > Great!!!, saves me the trouble of doing one myself :)
> >
>> > > that it conflicts quite a bit with the current Fedora lzma package. 
>> > > Below is
> >
> > really? Thats not good....  I spoke to the lzma upstream and he told me
> > that it was possible to have the to coexist in a system.  Reading your
> > mail interchange I see that it _is_ a possibility.  I would think this
> > to be the prefered solution so we don't break whatever is using the
> > original lzma command.
I agree that it seems possible.  It will require some changes to the lzma 
package though.

>> > > a copy of a quick mail exchange with the new Fedora lzma maintainer Milos
>> > > Jakubicek (Cc'd) we had in the beginning of May, I haven't heard back nor
>> > > have done anything myself neither to xz or lzma since.
> >
> > I would be interested in getting this in to fedora (having the two
> > coexist)  I'm guessing that the only thing needed is to change the
> > xz.spec file in such a way that, when installed, it does not conflict
> > with LZMA.  You mind if I use your spec file as a starting point for
> > this?  I would think, with my current workload, that I would make it
> > ready for f12 or f13(the latest).  Do you have any plans regarding this
> > package?
Not really, and by all means, please use my specfile if you find it useful, 
that's why I uploaded it in the first place ;)

Here's a breakdown of the conflicts and other compatibility issues between 
lzma and xz:

 Conflicts:
 * /usr/bin/lzcat
 * /usr/bin/lzma
 * /usr/bin/lzmadec
 * /usr/bin/unlzma
 * /usr/share/man/man1/lzdiff.1.gz
 * /usr/share/man/man1/lzgrep.1.gz
 * /usr/share/man/man1/lzmore.1.gz

 Included in lzma, not in xz:
 * /usr/bin/lzmainfo

 Included in lzma-libs, not in xz-libs:
 * liblzmadec.so.*

 Included in lzma-devel, not in xz-devel:
 * lzmadec.h
 * liblzmadec.so

Personally, I would approach this stuff from the POV that eventually xz will 
obsolete lzma altogether.  I think this could be a good way to go (just 
thinking aloud, not actually tested): Ship the xz package as is from my 
specfile, and modify the current Fedora lzma package so that everything else 
except lzmainfo and its man page is removed from the main lzma package, and 
add "Requires: xz" to the main package (leave lzma-libs and lzma-devel as is).

If you are in contact with upstream xz devs, I think it would be good to ask 
why lzmainfo is not included with xz.  If it was, the transition would be 
simpler; the xz main package could just obsolete the lzma main package, and 
the lzma source package could be modified so that the main package would be 
dropped, and only the -libs and -devel subpackages would be shipped.
"

I'll be able to look at this in more detail at weekend.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.