Compressing distribution tarballs for release with xz

Yves-Alexis Perez corsac at
Mon Aug 9 15:16:43 CEST 2010

On lun., 2010-08-09 at 14:09 +0200, Nick Schermer wrote:
> That doesn't really matter I think, my whole point is: are our
> packages large enough to get a *real* benefit from xz, because not
> much is downloaded from the Xfce servers (ie. compared to
> distributions, who really benefit from xz compression). 

TBH, when Xfce only provided .bz2 files and Debian didn't accept them,
we retarballized everything in .tar.gz. Now that dpkg/dak and the whole
Debian infrastructure accepts .bz2, we're fine with that, but it won't
accept .orig.tar.xz right now, so we'll have to repackage that.

Ubuntu had the same problem with Launchpad, I think it accepts bz2 now,
not sure about xz. Not sure either for Red Hat/Fedora, Suse etc.
Basically I think it's still a bit soon for distros, so they shouldn't
be the main argument for changing, at least.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <>

More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list