From owner-freebsd-security Sat May 13 8:41:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from public.bta.net.cn (public.bta.net.cn [202.96.0.97]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B16637B9CD for ; Sat, 13 May 2000 08:41:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robinson@netrinsics.com) Received: from netrinsics.com ([202.108.133.96]) by public.bta.net.cn (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA18637 for ; Sat, 13 May 2000 23:38:22 +0800 (GMT) Received: (from robinson@localhost) by netrinsics.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA13898; Sat, 13 May 2000 23:42:38 +0800 (+0800) (envelope-from robinson) Date: Sat, 13 May 2000 23:42:38 +0800 (+0800) From: Michael Robinson Message-Id: <200005131542.XAA13898@netrinsics.com> To: nate@yogotech.com Subject: Re: New packaging tool (was Re: Applying patches with out a compiler) Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200005131502.JAA04832@nomad.yogotech.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Nate Williams writes: >> Or, heck, why not JAR format, seeing as it's a well-defined standard, does >> everything necessary, and has multiple interoperable implementations. > >FWIW, it's the same format. :) :) Not strictly true. All JAR files are ZIP files, but not all ZIP files are JAR files. From your paen to the benefits of ZIP files, it sounded like you might go off and reinvent manifests, signature meta-data, and all the other stuff that's in the JAR spec, but in an incompatible, FreeBSD-specific way. -Michael Robinson To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message