Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:22:16 +0100 From: John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Eitan Adler <eadler@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: new USES=tar ? Message-ID: <531EFFF8.2080604@marino.st> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgk5etUEGDwtDkKDJcP4G3a_=UG9QQ7WgMviQRKwGhr%2BDQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <20140311110549.GK6900@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <CAF6rxgk5etUEGDwtDkKDJcP4G3a_=UG9QQ7WgMviQRKwGhr%2BDQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3/11/2014 13:16, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 11 March 2014 07:05, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> To be able to migrate most of the zip files to use bsdtar when they case we have >> added USES=zip[:infozip] for consistency I do plan to make the same kind of USES >> for every kind of archivers. I am puzzled on how to handle all the tar >> extensions what would your propose? >> >> One USES per extension? (USES=xz, USES=bzip2 etc?) >> >> or One USES=tar with arguments for extensions? > > Why does tar need an extension? why can't tar use the DISTFILE > itself? tar supports auto-detection of the format which it is > unzipping. For the automatic DISTFILES definition I assume. It does seem messy just to automatically determine DISTFILE file name though. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?531EFFF8.2080604>