<br><br>On Saturday, April 5, 2014, Chris Jones <<a href="mailto:jonesc@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk">jonesc@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
<br>
> On 5 Apr 2014, at 06:02 pm, Rainer Müller <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'raimue@macports.org')">raimue@macports.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 20:39:26 -0500, Ryan Schmidt wrote:<br>
>> Since the MacPorts build system now accommodates adding third-party<br>
>> software into the build, if pbzip2 works reliably, it might be nice<br>
>> to include it with MacPorts and use it at least for compression and<br>
>> decompression of the archives, if not also for bzip2 distfiles and<br>
>> patchfiles.<br>
><br>
> Fedora is currently in the progress of switching to lbzip2. I don't<br>
> know how if this implementation is related to pbzip2, but the goals<br>
> sound similar.<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/lbzip2" target="_blank">https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/lbzip2</a><br>
><br>
> We do not have a port for it yet, though.<br>
<br>
Reading the web site, they claim lbzip2 can handle unzipping any bz2 file in parallel, unlike pbzip2. This seems like a distinct advantage, and given it seems well maintained, i think makes it a much better replacement possibility.<br>
<br>
><br>
> Rainer<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>The only reservation I have is inexperience with lbzip2, and at least one comparison I saw cited high memory requirements and out of memory crashes with lbzip2. I will have to find the page when I'm back at a computer, and it may very well have been addressed by now.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Not being updated in a while is not a bad sign for a tool you just want to work.</div><div><br></div><div>The unzipping anything in parallel, however, is a distinct advantage, and makes it worth examining.</div>
<div><br></div><div> - Eric</div>