| |||||||||||||
Who maintains RPM? (2011 edition)Who maintains RPM? (2011 edition)Posted May 3, 2011 22:23 UTC (Tue) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)In reply to: Who maintains RPM? (2011 edition) by proyvind Parent article: Who maintains RPM? (2011 edition)
Some notes:
"rpm.org actually introduced lzma payload compression in 4.6.0 using the format that changed, making use of it resulting in rpms useless by anyone.
rpm 4.8 support comes from
4.6 release had a prominent note
http://www.rpm.org/wiki/Releases/4.6.0
"Experimental support for LZMA payloads has been added but this is unsupported as of 4.6.0 release, official support will be added in an update once a stable release of xz-utils (formerly lzma-utils) is available."
This is precisely the reason why Fedora didn't switchover to using lzma at that time and only switched over when the feature was not experimental anymore.
"Hah, yeah, you'd certainly have more faith and find yum's support for this more credible than what berkeley db has offered as functionality for years.."
This is a comparison between two different things are a different level. Doesn't seem that meaningful.
"Yeah, go ask the SuSE guys about their involvement with rpm.org, the last communication they ever had with Fedora was the RPM Summit nearly two years ago, with nothing ever happening or communication taking place since, with zero direct involvement in upstream development.."
They had communicated that they haven't allotted resources to upstream rpm development (this isn't a advantage for rpm5.org either) and haven't done much work but the amount of communication or patches are not zero.
(Log in to post comments)
Who maintains RPM? (2011 edition) Posted May 3, 2011 22:31 UTC (Tue) by proyvind (guest, #74683) [Link]
http://www.rpm.org/ticket/84 has nothing to do with payload support, it's only support for extracting lzma/xz compressed archives.
Here's the patch that added both proper lzma_alone & xz payload support http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/2009-March/00237... that rpm.org ended up adopting (where they didn't orginally even plan on supporting the legacy lzma_alone format that others were and are still using).
Who maintains RPM? (2011 edition) Posted May 3, 2011 22:44 UTC (Tue) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
Yes, Got the ticket number wrong. LZMA was legacy and author had informed folks that there is a newer and stable format in the pipeline and not to rely on LZMA. Hence the lack of support for it in rpm.org.
Who maintains RPM? (2011 edition) Posted May 3, 2011 23:44 UTC (Tue) by proyvind (guest, #74683) [Link]
yes, but they now support both lzma_alone (legacy) and xz payload, as was contributed by me after all.. ;)
|
|||||||||||||