Re: Anyone object to removing LZF?

I've tried both lzf and lzo, and found that lzo is faster and produces
smaller image.

Fri, 26 Oct 2012 11:43:20 +1100 від Nigel Cunningham
<[email protected]>:

> Hi all.
> 
> For a long time now, LZF has been being distributed with the TuxOnIce 
> patch as a new Cryptoapi plugin. Now that it's been a few months
> since we found the issue that was wrongly making us think it was more
> reliable than LZO, I'm thinking about removing the LZF code from the
> patch.
> 
> Does anyone object, and if so, why?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Nigel
> _______________________________________________
> TuxOnIce-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.tuxonice.net/listinfo/tuxonice-devel

_______________________________________________
TuxOnIce-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.tuxonice.net/listinfo/tuxonice-devel

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQijm4AAoJELftKrVLdx04brkH+gOfzK7z+HXlmDMn35M26Chc
Z6H9YYwud7WTvVIPMPsg8XJjd8tsH3jykJROpYSUq7UV5aQDOe0ySP1CPnrvizU4
K71tJqK8jzkscWOLsS8zVM3WuQoUeIYIQVPUEqZ3KVCtAksmb3nNuONH2wdEd8Fl
JEL1QHKh1g45iJTW4ibYLsXbp4EansHiROvXk9pEeh6E/Sdc3PkDPK+WCFVC5Uf0
qo3I4cbYgQNJkjoh0VixCAzz3VDBZLP/KXi9oJkjG54g5YmW17xM6IFNCH3QHnkT
zi4RutazDy5MY/Uw8RkYLt/dpgQ1l6Io8vbiLv8CNCVdicGxRnfJQCCXPzsY+DY=
=/hN4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----