Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 09:39:49 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Simon Shapiro <Shimon@i-connect.net> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Checking the integrity of system files Message-ID: <199708261539.JAA25643@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.970825232450.Shimon@i-Connect.Net> References: <199708251836.MAA20814@rocky.mt.sri.com> <XFMail.970825232450.Shimon@i-Connect.Net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Is there something funamentally wrong with the pkg format that is > > > already in use for the packages? > > > > Yeah, it requires 'unpacking' the sources in a temp directory, and then > > moving them to their actual locations. This means you must have 2X+ > > room to install a package. .2-8X room for the gzipped package, 1X room > > for the unpacked sources, and 1X room for the installed sources. > > > > This is why moving to a standard format like ZIP would be nice since it > > has a 'package listing' built in (plus encryption, passwords, and other > > nice features which could be used by commercial software). > > Unfortunately, no-one has the time/interest to build a 'zip' library. > > One neat trick there is actually keeping the package as an ar(chive) of > gzipped files. Sounds crazy, but consider: > > * Almost no space for the framework. True. > * Files can be extracted individually, and rapidly (well, faster than > tar/cpio) True. > * Everyone has one already. True. > * TOC is trivial. Well, you have to run 'ar' to get the TOC (similar to what Jordan does already). > * You can even take components out and put new ones in. True. But, zip keeps things like ownership and permissions as well, and I'm pretty sure 'ar' doesn't. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708261539.JAA25643>