From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Jul 9 23:47:18 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C5B537B400; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 23:47:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.nsu.ru (mx.nsu.ru [193.124.215.71]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A8D143E09; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 23:47:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: from drweb by mail.nsu.ru with drweb-scanned (Exim 3.20 #1) id 17SBFa-0005c0-00; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:46:58 +0700 Received: from regency.nsu.ru ([193.124.210.26]) by mail.nsu.ru with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 17SBFZ-0005bo-00; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:46:57 +0700 Received: from regency.nsu.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by regency.nsu.ru (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id g6A6lZLF046834; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:47:35 +0700 (NOVST) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: (from danfe@localhost) by regency.nsu.ru (8.12.4/8.12.4/Submit) id g6A6lZkD046788; Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:47:35 +0700 (NOVST) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:47:34 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Archie Cobbs Cc: Dan Moschuk , Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Wes Peters , arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Package system flaws? Message-ID: <20020710134734.C35244@regency.nsu.ru> References: <20020707153457.GA1086@scoobysnax.jaded.net> <200207100310.g6A3AZB23117@arch20m.dellroad.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <200207100310.g6A3AZB23117@arch20m.dellroad.org>; from archie@dellroad.org on Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 08:10:35PM -0700 X-Envelope-To: archie@dellroad.org, dan@freebsd.org, des@ofug.org, wes@softweyr.com, arch@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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