Bugzilla Bug 198314

good to get standard lzma utilities available for everyone as some GNU projects
move to using it

elmer ~ # qfile /usr/bin/lzma
app-arch/lzma-utils (/usr/bin/lzma)
app-arch/p7zip (/usr/bin/lzma)

4.32.0_beta5: Stable for HPPA.
4.32.2      : Marked ~hppa.

Stable on x86

Stable for SPARC.

alpha/ia64 stable

ppc stable

ppc64 stable

uh, blocker?

(In reply to comment #1)
> elmer ~ # qfile /usr/bin/lzma
> app-arch/lzma-utils (/usr/bin/lzma)
> app-arch/p7zip (/usr/bin/lzma)
> 

yeah, amd64 not stable

vapier, thanks

p7zip-4.55-r1, lzma-utils-4.32.2 stable for amd64.

Hi all,
/usr/bin/lzma from lzma-utils and from (p7zip, lzma) are not equivalent.
I'm sure their developers have tried to talk before doing this mess...

I think we could rename lzma's lzma to something else, so it is not blocking
the other.
Sure lzma-utils's syntax is "standard" but the other has more control of the
compression, and is the "original".

I also think there should be an ewarn to warn users that there are 2 different
lzma executables... 

no one said they were equivalent

the lzma from the p7zip package and from the lzma package however are
equivalent, so p7zip providing lzma makes no sense

if the lzma binary from lzma-utils is missing functionality, then it should be
mentioned on the lzma-utils mailing list

in the Gentoo world, lzma-utils is going to become dejure and defacto standard
for /usr/bin/lzma

renaming the "original" lzma binary in the lzma package to something else
sounds fine to me, but i'm not the maintainer for that so you'll have to file
another bug report ;)

I share your view that if there is a lzma package, then lzma shouldn't be in
p7zip (can give problems with deps (eg. lrzip), and already told radek that
some time ago.
It seems that someone removed lzma from p7zip, and I'm kind of grateful ;)
Unfortunately the lzma ebuild is a bit outdated.. but it works.

I'm going to get more information...

are you going to attempt contact with the lzma-utils developers concerning
short comings in it compared to lzma ?

I don't think that there are "shortcomings" in the lzma-utils package except
the lack of options.
In my option it just needs to use equivalent command-line options as lzma
(which can be useful, like multi-threaded compression).

I mailed the devs to get some information because I don't know some basic
things.
A few months ago I mailed on the 7zip mailing list concerning unix stuff, and I
was redirected to p7zip's guys.
p7zip modifies code from the lzma sdk to make it posix-compatible. Resulting in
different code.
Now there is lzma-utils, using an 2005 version of the sdk.
I don't know if all this people are working together...
If you know more you can tell me (us)

I've had my answers.
There is a dialog between the developpers of 7zip, p7zip, and lzma-utils.

lzma-utils is evolving (not quite as fast as their devs would have wanted.. )
and will soon make lzma_alone deprecated.

At the moment, given the situation, I propose that lzma_alone be renamed to
lzma_alone (vs. being removed or conflicting), or if you have a better idea...
:)

And we can expect a new version soon.