Dan McGee wrote: > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Xavier<[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Cedric Staniewski<[email protected]> wrote: >>> Xavier wrote: >>>> But should we remove the symlink manually then? >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> pacman-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev >>> I'm not sure. Always thought they are there on purpose (mostly used >>> bsdtar), even though they are usually not needful. >>> >>> The current behaviors are: >>> bsdtar keeps symlinks >>> gunzip removes symlinks >>> bunzip2 removes symlinks >>> xz keeps symlinks >> Thank you, thats very informative :) >> So we were already inconsistent before. >> What about always keeping symlinks, ie adding -k to gunzip and bunzip2 as >> well? > > We should always keep, this was probably an oversight when adding > direct decompression of non-tar formats. That way someone can very > easily see what source was copied in that directory both before and > after decompression. > > -Dan > _______________________________________________ > pacman-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
Unfortunately, gzip/gunzip do not have something like a -k option and it seems that there are no plans to add one [1,2]. The only possibilities are recreating the link or decompressing to stdout (gzip -dc file.gz > file). By the way, another issue might be the use of file, because decompressing via gzip/bzip2/xz without the -c option relies on the suffix. [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00039.html [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=240539 _______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
