Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2015 08:58:36 +0000 From: Dangling Pointer <danglingpointer@outlook.com> To: Ben Woods <woodsb02@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Unzip utility choice decision Message-ID: <BAY169-W68135044614185DE64309CA7F80@phx.gbl> In-Reply-To: <CAOc73CD0wUexp9JA4iEOW%2BqEPcCf7gfBhygLx_6WqNsAyCk1Yw@mail.gmail.com> References: <BAY169-W9776556FEBDA58E22FA457A71A0@phx.gbl>, <CAOc73CAWJd05L0P833XzmgMXuUDd3hX2ypcbUmQfNxCBoS2rHA@mail.gmail.com>, <BAY169-W71CF3A8E16B1C9CD623C54A7E60@phx.gbl>, <CAOc73CD0wUexp9JA4iEOW%2BqEPcCf7gfBhygLx_6WqNsAyCk1Yw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
If my race-condition usecase is hard to reproduce (since it requires you to= spawn unzip as a child process in multiple threads simultaneously)=2C see = http://www.unix.com/man-page/freebsd/1/unzip/ vs. http://www.unix.com/man-p= age/linux/1/unzip/ for the "at-the-glance HUGE difference". Mind you=2C min= e is not the only usecase which requires install overhead of "unzip from po= rts".=20 > The answer is of course for the more permissive license. Is it? This is exactly what I have asked in first post: What is the point o= f having another unzip utility with lesser implementation and options=2C wh= en we already have one. Is it because of license differences? Yes/No (prefe= rably in a non-sarcastic manner..) I am not sure about the answer=2C that is why I am asking. If the license is "not" the issue (since other Unices are using the ORIGINA= L unzip utility OOTB)=2C then FreeBSD team should consider adapting to the = same for cent percent conformity. Otherwise this question will get its due = answer and I would vouch for having it renamed to something like unzip2=2C = so consumers know unzip2 (which comes pre-installed) and unzip (which can b= e installed by issuing `pkg install unzip`) are two different utilities=2C = with different authors=2C different licenses and different set of options. > Date: Wed=2C 23 Dec 2015 09:23:47 +0100 > Subject: Unzip utility choice decision > From: woodsb02@gmail.com > To: danglingpointer@outlook.com > CC: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >=20 > On Wednesday=2C 23 December 2015=2C Dangling Pointer < > danglingpointer@outlook.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D=2C'cvml'=2C'danglingpointer@outlook.com')=3B>> wrot= e: >=20 > > Those options are not contradictory with `pkg install unzip` version. T= hat > > -uoq combination is an advance usage which save us from a race conditio= n. > > >=20 > Can you please explain this race condition further=2C and how the -uoq fl= ags > combined help prevent it when running simultaneous unzip commands? >=20 >=20 > > > > What I am really saying is: > > > > There is a universally known unzip utility which offers many options an= d > > then there is FreeBSD version of unzip with less options. That makes no > > sense to me. Why would you want to have a separate unzip utility? > > >=20 > This is for the same reason that there is a "universally recognized" > document editor called Microsoft Word. Why would you have a separate Open > Office application? The answer is of course for the more permissive licen= se. >=20 > Regards=2C > Ben >=20 >=20 > --=20 >=20 > -- > From: Benjamin Woods > woodsb02@gmail.com > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe=2C send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd= .org" =
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAY169-W68135044614185DE64309CA7F80>