On 09/16/2009 08:39 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-16 at 08:10 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> This is a logical leap. rsync has forked zlib but they are only using
> the fork internally. 2 and 3 get that fork out in the open so that
> more
> than one program can use it. 2 and 3 are solutions when solution 1
> fails. Since solution 1 has failed, 2 and 3 become *relevant*, not
> moot.
I beg your pardon, but how are rsync and zsync supposed to use upstream
zlib (points 2,3) if the upstream lib does not have the features they
need ???
Ah -- I was reading that as three separate options. I can see how it
could be read as three steps in a single solution as well.
That still leaves open the question of why no one has asked rsync
upstream to make their fork publicly available instead of hoarding it as
a private, internal copy.
-Toshio