Hi Guillem, On 2014-08-13 12:54, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Mon, 2014-08-11 at 23:19:45 +0200, Christian Kastner wrote: >> On 2014-08-11 22:05, Guillem Jover wrote: >>> This is rather unwise, for no apparent reason. The -z9 seems to be a >>> common pattern in most (if not all) of Daniel's packages, and I think >>> should be reverted, if absent of a good rationale. >> >> Oh, I forgot that this is still present in wheezy's version. I already >> removed it in unstable. >> >>>> Anyhoo, reassigning to dpkg in case the have seen something similar before. >>> >>> Reassigning back, this would need fixing in a stable release. >> >> I'm a bit confused - could you elaborate on what you mean by that? > > Given that the -z9 setting makes the package unextractable on some > systems (which from my PoV makes it an RC bug) and is Priority:standard, > which means it will be pulled in on most systems, IMO it deserves to be > fixed in the affected Debian release, which in this case is stable > (wheezy). Hope that clarifies?
Yes, thanks. My mistake was to conclude that there was no use case for this. A fix in stable would probably have no effect on a system already running stable, as that would imply that unpacking of the current -z9 version had already succeeded. What I didn't think of were the use cases of upgrading from oldstable, and new installations. >>> But given that this is a Priority:standard package, I'd say it makes >>> sense to do so. Thanks, Christian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
