Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 15:04:48 -0700 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: Archie Cobbs <archie@dellroad.org> Cc: Dan Moschuk <dan@FreeBSD.ORG>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Package system flaws? Message-ID: <3D2E0100.C8958F07@softweyr.com> References: <200207100310.g6A3AZB23117@arch20m.dellroad.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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.
>
> So I'd say cpio is better than tar, though something else altogether
> might be better than both.
Tar and cpio both have anachronisms due to being "tape backup" utilities.
I'd hope we could come up with some simple archive format that essentially
encodes the inode data and file data and is smart about unfilled blocks.
Make it into a library so it can be used by this AND OTHER utilities
easily.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.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?3D2E0100.C8958F07>