SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
According to http://tukaani.org/xz/ there is a data corruption bug in XZ Utils versions prior to 4.999.9beta. I know I can update it locally but I didn't know what Slackware's position was on updating bugs like this in a stable release, especially since 13.0 uses xz for distributing packages.
BTW, it is soooo nice to finally have a stable 64-bit version for use at work. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Now, I just chuckle watching the other dev's constantly downloading huge updates.
Sorry for asking, as well as my ignorance, but what is wrong with libtool-2.x.y?
And does this mean that xz on Slackware will always be beta?
Not too terribly long ago, lots of other upstream stuff didn't like it too well, and other distros that had moved to libtool2 were having some issues; at least one of them shipped both libtool1 and libtool2, and quite frankly, that's not something that I had ANY desire to work out all the details involved.
Lately though, it seems to be fine in my testing here; there are a few things that have to be rebuilt, and so far, everything I've tried to build has compiled just fine. Long story short, I don't know the answer to your second question, but also don't expect libtool to be a holdup. Of course, that's not my decision though :-)
Uh, I checked this out today, and xz-4.999.9beta builds just fine with older versions of libtool. I'm still using libtool-1.5.22.
As far as libtool-2.x, it supposedly fixes at least one long-standing, subtle-but-serious bug.
The new version of xz has a significant number of fixes -some of which may improve the memory footprint. Probably worth having a longer look at it.
Uh, I checked this out today, and xz-4.999.9beta builds just fine with older versions of libtool. I'm still using libtool-1.5.22.
Interesting. I haven't actually tried building it - I was just basing my conclusion on the git log.
Quote:
As far as libtool-2.x, it supposedly fixes at least one long-standing, subtle-but-serious bug.
Is that the one where unnecessary "deps" are included to the libtool archive (.la) file? If so, that's good - several of the xorg-related updates wouldn't have been necessary but for that bug.
Quote:
The new version of xz has a significant number of fixes -some of which may improve the memory footprint. Probably worth having a longer look at it.
Well, I'll definitely check it out for -current, but I still wouldn't get hopes up for 13.0 /patches :-)
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.