lzma itself already replaced by xz-lzma-compat several months ago.
xz-lzma-compat provides lzma=5.
在2010-02-13?02:10:23,"Milos?Jakubicek"?<xjakub@fi.muni.cz>?写道:
Oh,?I?didn't?really?notice?how?your?repoquery?looks?like?before.
Libarchive?is?ok,?but?there?are?others:
?>repoquery?--whatrequires?--alldeps?lzma?lzma-libs?lzma-devel?
--enablerepo=rawhide
rpm-build-0:4.7.1-6.fc12.x86_64
rpm-build-0:4.8.0-9.fc13.x86_64
man-0:1.6f-25.fc12.x86_64
autoarchive-0:0.1.2-2.fc12.noarch
rpm-build-0:4.7.2-1.fc12.x86_64
man-0:1.6f-22.fc12.x86_64
man-0:1.6f-26.fc13.x86_64
man-0:1.6f-24.fc12.x86_64
lzma-libs-0:4.32.7-3.fc12.x86_64
lzma-0:4.32.7-3.fc12.x86_64
lzma-libs-0:4.32.7-3.fc12.i686
lzma-devel-0:4.32.7-3.fc12.x86_64
lzma-devel-0:4.32.7-3.fc12.i686
...which?need?to?be?sorted?out.
CC'ing?autoarchive,?man?and?rpm?maintainers:
Ivana,?Panu,?Fabian:?are?your?packages?able?to?use?xz?instead?
(I?guess?in?case?of?rpm?this?is?just?a?relict,?right?)
In?all?cases?the?lzma?dependency?is?hardcoded,?can?hopefully?be?just?
removed.
If?yes,?I?can?retire?lzma?as?soon?as?we?branch?F13.
Milos
On?12.2.2010?18:35,?Chen?Lei?wrote:
>?In?fact?libarchive?doesn't?require?lzma-libs?any?more?in?F12?and?F13.
>?For?F11:
>?repoquery?--whatrequires?libarchive.so.2
>?PackageKit-glib-0:0.4.9-1.fc11.i586
>?libarchive-0:2.6.2-1.fc11.i586
>?kdeutils-6:4.2.2-4.fc11.i586
>?PackageKit-glib-0:0.4.6-8.fc11.i586
>?libarchive-devel-0:2.6.2-1.fc11.i586
>?Updating?libarchive?to?the?F12?only?affects?a?few?stuffs(soname?unchanged).
>
>?在2010-02-13??01:02:56,"Milos??Jakubicek"??<xjakub@fi.muni.cz??<mailto:xjakub@fi.muni.cz>>??写道:
>>Hi??Chen,
>>
>>On??12.2.2010??12:50,??Chen??Lei??wrote:
>>>??I??realized??from??"http://tukaani.org/xz/"????the??core??of??the??xz??utils
>>>??compression??code??is??based??on??LZMA??SDK??<http://7-zip.org/sdk.html>,??but
>>>??it??has??been??modified??quite??a??lot??to??be??suitable??for??XZ??Utils.
>>>??So??I??think??we??should??ship??lzma??sdk??for??fedora??in??parallel??with??xz??utils
>>>??and??p7zip.??Since??xz??utils??are??the??successor??to??lzma??utils,??maybe??lzma
>>>??utils??can??be??safely??retired??in??fedora.
>>
>>Retiring??lzma??(completely)??is??a??long-term??plan,??yes??(I'm??the??maintainer
>>of??it).??Not??sure??about??the??right??time??--??F14?
>>
>>I'll??talk??to??the??libarchive??maintainer??--??any??other??objections??against
>>the??plan??to??retire??lzma??for??F14?
>>
>>Milos
>
>
>
>
>