RFC: Remove .lzma in favor of .xz portage snapshots
 

Hello all, This email is to solicit concerns or thoughts about removing
the .lzma portage snapshots.


The facts:
- Starting on 2011-03-03, I enabled .xz compression on snapshots that
Gentoo makes available[1].

- On 2011-01-05, Mike added[2] .xz support to emerge-webrsync.
- xz-utils is now in the system set[3] anyway and .xz instead of .lzma
should eliminate some confusion for new users.


That is about all I can think of. My opinion is that this is mostly a
cosmetic change (as lzma is generated via xz-utils anyway) but makes
sense given the popular[4] compression choices. I'd like to target
2011-04-01 as the date to turn off lzma generation. After generation is
turned off, the lzma archives will fall off the mirrors in 7 days. Any
concerns?


Thanks,
Jeremy

[1]: http://gentoo.osuosl.org/snapshots/
[2]:
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=9ff806
[3]:
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_998b4e7fdf578346bb5cfc66be340f7d.xml
[4]: Without known data to back this up, I'm using the short options of
tar(1) to form some opinion as presented by the community.

RFC: Remove .lzma in favor of .xz portage snapshots
 

On Friday, March 04, 2011 12:33:08 Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> Hello all, This email is to solicit concerns or thoughts about removing
> the .lzma portage snapshots.
>
> The facts:
> - Starting on 2011-03-03, I enabled .xz compression on snapshots that
> Gentoo makes available[1].
> - On 2011-01-05, Mike added[2] .xz support to emerge-webrsync.
> - xz-utils is now in the system set[3] anyway and .xz instead of .lzma
> should eliminate some confusion for new users.
>
> That is about all I can think of. My opinion is that this is mostly a
> cosmetic change (as lzma is generated via xz-utils anyway) but makes
> sense given the popular[4] compression choices. I'd like to target
> 2011-04-01 as the date to turn off lzma generation. After generation is
> turned off, the lzma archives will fall off the mirrors in 7 days. Any
> concerns?

i dont think we're generating .xz yet ... otherwise, let's do it
-mike

RFC: Remove .lzma in favor of .xz portage snapshots
 

On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:18:40 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:

On Friday, March 04, 2011 12:33:08 Jeremy Olexa wrote:

<snip>
The facts:
- Starting on 2011-03-03, I enabled .xz compression on snapshots
that

Gentoo makes available[1].
<snip>


i dont think we're generating .xz yet ... otherwise, let's do it
-mike


It makes me sad that you didn't even read my first bullet point :) Yes.
We are generating xz snapshots now.

-Jeremy

RFC: Remove .lzma in favor of .xz portage snapshots
 

On Friday, March 04, 2011 16:23:59 Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:18:40 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday, March 04, 2011 12:33:08 Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >> The facts:
> >> - Starting on 2011-03-03, I enabled .xz compression on snapshots
> >>
> >> that
> >>
> >> Gentoo makes available[1].
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >
> > i dont think we're generating .xz yet ... otherwise, let's do it
> > -mike
>
> It makes me sad that you didn't even read my first bullet point :)

i thought you were talking about something else :P
-mike

RFC: Remove .lzma in favor of .xz portage snapshots
 

On 03/04/2011 11:33 AM, Jeremy Olexa wrote:

Hello all, This email is to solicit concerns or thoughts about removing
the .lzma portage snapshots.

The facts:
- Starting on 2011-03-03, I enabled .xz compression on snapshots that
Gentoo makes available[1].
- On 2011-01-05, Mike added[2] .xz support to emerge-webrsync.
- xz-utils is now in the system set[3] anyway and .xz instead of .lzma
should eliminate some confusion for new users.

That is about all I can think of. My opinion is that this is mostly a
cosmetic change (as lzma is generated via xz-utils anyway) but makes
sense given the popular[4] compression choices. I'd like to target
2011-04-01 as the date to turn off lzma generation. After generation is
turned off, the lzma archives will fall off the mirrors in 7 days. Any
concerns?


Done as of today, ahead of schedule because I have time now :)
-Jeremy



Thanks,
Jeremy

[1]: http://gentoo.osuosl.org/snapshots/
[2]:
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=9ff806
[3]:
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_998b4e7fdf578346bb5cfc66be340f7d.xml

[4]: Without known data to back this up, I'm using the short options of
tar(1) to form some opinion as presented by the community.