Re: On bz2 compression in debs

2007-08-24 Thread Ian Jackson
I'm not sure if I really want to get into the bz2-vs-gz argument again but there is a question here that's easy to answer: Romain Francoise writes ("On bz2 compression in debs"): > 2) Doesn't the disappearance of 'data.tar.gz' warrant a bump of the > binary version number, from 2.0 to, say, 3

Re: On bz2 compression in debs

2007-08-24 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Romain Francoise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So my questions are: > > 1) If deb(5) is authoritative, am I right in thinking that bz2 > compression is a policy violation at the moment? Yes and no. deb(5) is authorative but out of sync with the implementation imho. > 2) Doesn't the disappe

Re: On bz2 compression in debs

2007-08-21 Thread Romain Francoise
Felipe Sateler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/10/msg02053.html > The above link says it should be 3.0 for bz2 compressed binary debs: I know, that's why I mentioned it. But it's from 1999. -- ,''`. : :' :Romain Francoise <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: On bz2 compression in debs

2007-08-19 Thread Felipe Sateler
Romain Francoise wrote: > 2) Doesn't the disappearance of 'data.tar.gz' warrant a bump of the > binary version number, from 2.0 to, say, 3.0? > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/10/msg02053.html The above link says it should be 3.0 for bz2 compressed binary debs: > Dpkg-deb will