On Tue, Oct 26, 1999 at 05:06:34PM -0400, Chris Pimlott wrote: > On 21 Oct 1999, Goswin Brederlow wrote: > > Of cause policy should encourage to use bzip2 (or gzip if smaller) and > > base packages must use tar.gz (or tar.bz2 if bzip2 is in base) so > > that one can update debian. Any package using a non default > > compression must predepend on that compressor, but that should be > > clear for the packaging scripts and maintainer. > > If there has to be a line added to control, why not instead make a > new line such as "Archive: tar.bz2" (with Archive: tar.gz assumed if > not specified) and not worry about a custom how_to_unpack script? > Granted, this method would only support predefined types but would be > simpler, and there aren't _that_ many formats people are dying to use - > tar.gz and tar.bz2 (and possibly tar.Z) could probably make 99.9% of > everyone happy, and stuff like tar.zip, tar.arj, tar.lha etc could be > added if anyone really wanted it.
Why even have that when the name of the .tar.(bz2|gz) is already in the .dsc? This is how I already have it setup in a test package. There is no need to add all the complexity. Ben
