Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 18:11:08 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/gzip gzip.c Message-ID: <20080310180939.V70549@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <200803101348.47724.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200803091349.m29Dn91v003746@repoman.freebsd.org> <200803101244.52073.jhb@freebsd.org> <20080310171551.Y70549@fledge.watson.org> <200803101348.47724.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008, John Baldwin wrote: >>> So are we creating packages for ports that are compressed with gzip but >>> using bzip names? Otherwise, gunzip should probably fail on a '.tbz' >>> because it isn't a gzipped file (unless gunzip auto-invokes bunzip2 or >>> some such feature that I'm not aware of). >> >> gunzip is smarter than you think. :-) > > Hmm. I guess I would consider it a user error to use gunzip on a bzip'd > file (round peg, square hole sort of deal). However, that has more to do > with the functionality (which I find surprising and perhaps a bit > non-UNIX-ish) rather than this specific patch. Yeah -- this change was really just about teaching gunzip that unzipping a .tbz or .tbz2 file is like unzipping a .tgz or .tgz2 file as was the case for .tgz: rename it to .tar when it's unzipped. The functionality to unzip bz2 files was already present, you just end up with a different file extension when done. I can see arguments for and against that, but nothing to do with the patch I committed. :-) Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080310180939.V70549>