Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 00:57:38 -0600 From: Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com> To: Dangling Pointer <danglingpointer@outlook.com> Cc: Ben Woods <woodsb02@gmail.com>, "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Unzip utility choice decision Message-ID: <CA%2BtpaK0Vkky9B28OUgH2X1gnkDHxEQ_VLFberBvAVu7nm6HdaA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <BAY169-W71CF3A8E16B1C9CD623C54A7E60@phx.gbl> References: <BAY169-W9776556FEBDA58E22FA457A71A0@phx.gbl> <CAOc73CAWJd05L0P833XzmgMXuUDd3hX2ypcbUmQfNxCBoS2rHA@mail.gmail.com> <BAY169-W71CF3A8E16B1C9CD623C54A7E60@phx.gbl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 11:56 PM, Dangling Pointer < danglingpointer@outlook.com> wrote: > Those options are not contradictory with `pkg install unzip` version. That > -uoq combination is an advance usage which save us from a race condition. > What I am really saying is: > There is a universally known unzip utility which offers many options and > then there is FreeBSD version of unzip with less options. That makes no > sense to me. What makes no sense to me is why you cannot use one of that standard methods of dealing with base vs pkg conflicts which everyone else does. > Why would you want to have a separate unzip utility? > There are several reasons for this and they are all very logical and appreciated by the community at large. This is partially explained in the man page if you can be bothered to read it. -- Adam
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BtpaK0Vkky9B28OUgH2X1gnkDHxEQ_VLFberBvAVu7nm6HdaA>