Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 9 Jul 2002 20:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Archie Cobbs <archie@dellroad.org>
To:        Dan Moschuk <dan@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Package system flaws?
Message-ID:  <200207100310.g6A3AZB23117@arch20m.dellroad.org>
In-Reply-To: <20020707153457.GA1086@scoobysnax.jaded.net> "from Dan Moschuk at Jul 7, 2002 11:34:57 am"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dan Moschuk writes:
> I don't think using an archive format like zip would be a step in the
> right direction.  If the package file format were to be redesigned, I would 
> vote for a custom header prepended to a bziped tarball.

tar has a limitation which I've encountered: suppose you have a port
that installs a man page with lots of references (i.e., hard linked
files with different names with a single underlying file). Then in
tar format, you get the same file copied N times. If we used cpio
instead (for example) then it "knows" how to handle hard links.

So I'd say cpio is better than tar, though something else altogether
might be better than both.

-Archie

__________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs     *     Packet Design     *     http://www.packetdesign.com

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200207100310.g6A3AZB23117>