Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:47:34 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@regency.nsu.ru> To: Archie Cobbs <archie@dellroad.org> Cc: Dan Moschuk <dan@freebsd.org>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Package system flaws? Message-ID: <20020710134734.C35244@regency.nsu.ru> In-Reply-To: <200207100310.g6A3AZB23117@arch20m.dellroad.org>; from archie@dellroad.org on Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 08:10:35PM -0700 References: <20020707153457.GA1086@scoobysnax.jaded.net> <200207100310.g6A3AZB23117@arch20m.dellroad.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 08:10:35PM -0700, Archie Cobbs wrote: > 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. Uhm, I'm afraid you are wrong on this one: [danfe@regency:ttypb] /tmp/tar> echo "123123" > foo [danfe@regency:ttypb] /tmp/tar> ln foo bar [danfe@regency:ttypb] /tmp/tar> ls -i 43 bar 43 foo [danfe@regency:ttypb] /tmp/tar> tar cvf ../foobar.tar . ./ foo bar [danfe@regency:ttypb] /tmp/tar> rm * [danfe@regency:ttypb] /tmp/tar> ls -i [danfe@regency:ttypb] /tmp/tar> tar xvf ../foobar.tar ./ foo bar [danfe@regency:ttypb] /tmp/tar> ls -i 48 bar 48 foo [danfe@regency:ttypb] /tmp/tar> ./danfe 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?20020710134734.C35244>