Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
On Friday 26 January 2007 17:41, Mike Frysinger wrote: > that said, i would entertain the notion of auto uncompressing > just .bz2, .gz, .Z and telling everyone else to toss off ... talking with zmedico; this is what he wants so ive implemented this -mike pgplsTrnzmpNo.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
On Friday 26 January 2007 17:19, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Friday 26 January 2007 14:12, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > > Furthermore, maybe it could check the compression type if any on the > > original and then > > i purposefully choose to not go this route because i dont want to start > adding handling for arbitrary compression types ... when such a list > exists, we always get people who want use to add support for their > $favorite-compression that said, i would entertain the notion of auto uncompressing just .bz2, .gz, .Z and telling everyone else to toss off ... -mike pgpHRxxfCkiK9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Friday 26 January 2007 14:03, Petteri Räty wrote: >> Wouldn't it be better to make doman gunzip and recompress until packages >> have been fixed. Now users are getting broken man pages with recent >> portage. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163954 > > considering the trivial amount of time required to fix a package, i'm not > sure > it's worth it > -mike Yeah but Portage can't go stable with this feature until the whole tree is checked to work with it. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
On Friday 26 January 2007 14:03, Petteri Räty wrote: > Wouldn't it be better to make doman gunzip and recompress until packages > have been fixed. Now users are getting broken man pages with recent > portage. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163954 considering the trivial amount of time required to fix a package, i'm not sure it's worth it -mike pgpM14tIqYgmb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
On Friday 26 January 2007 14:12, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > Furthermore, maybe it could check the compression type if any on the > original and then i purposefully choose to not go this route because i dont want to start adding handling for arbitrary compression types ... when such a list exists, we always get people who want use to add support for their $favorite-compression -mike pgpkYLMOR7tv7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
On Friday 26 January 2007 20:12, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > > Furthermore, maybe it could check the compression type if any on the > original and then > a) If file isn't compressed yet compress with the chosen method > (compressor) by user > b) If file is compressed with the same compressor than chosen by user do > nothing > c) If file is compressed with a different compressor than chosen by > user, decompress and recompress with chosen compressor > > Sounds like that could work as a long term solution. No? It would be my prefference too. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net pgpw6s935ltoT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 21:03 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: > > the new version of portage has customizable compression ... this is cool as > > now people can do bzip/gzip/whatever > > > > the downside is that it breaks with packages that assume everything is > > compressed with gzip ... so here is a list of common things ebuilds should > > not be doing: > > doman foo.1.gz > > dosym foo.1.gz /usr/share/man/man1/fooie.1.gz > > dodoc README.gz > > etc... > > -mike > > Wouldn't it be better to make doman gunzip and recompress until packages > have been fixed. Now users are getting broken man pages with recent portage. > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163954 Furthermore, maybe it could check the compression type if any on the original and then a) If file isn't compressed yet compress with the chosen method (compressor) by user b) If file is compressed with the same compressor than chosen by user do nothing c) If file is compressed with a different compressor than chosen by user, decompress and recompress with chosen compressor Sounds like that could work as a long term solution. No? -- Mart Raudsepp Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
Mike Frysinger wrote: > the new version of portage has customizable compression ... this is cool as > now people can do bzip/gzip/whatever > > the downside is that it breaks with packages that assume everything is > compressed with gzip ... so here is a list of common things ebuilds should > not be doing: > doman foo.1.gz > dosym foo.1.gz /usr/share/man/man1/fooie.1.gz > dodoc README.gz > etc... > -mike Wouldn't it be better to make doman gunzip and recompress until packages have been fixed. Now users are getting broken man pages with recent portage. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163954 Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
On Friday 26 January 2007 03:40, Harald van Dijk wrote: > I'm asking, hoping for an explicit answer: so if upstream provides > gzip-compressed files, should ebuilds gunzip them, install them, and > then let portage recompress them? currently i'm of the opinion yes ... while i would say it isnt uncommon for this to happen (just finished fixing a few packages actually), i would say it is quite the minority of packages, so just do `gunzip` in src_unpack -mike pgpGLPtxdkwKk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 03:19:23AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > the new version of portage has customizable compression ... this is cool as > now people can do bzip/gzip/whatever > > the downside is that it breaks with packages that assume everything is > compressed with gzip ... so here is a list of common things ebuilds should > not be doing: > doman foo.1.gz > dosym foo.1.gz /usr/share/man/man1/fooie.1.gz > dodoc README.gz I'm asking, hoping for an explicit answer: so if upstream provides gzip-compressed files, should ebuilds gunzip them, install them, and then let portage recompress them? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] ecompress heads up
the new version of portage has customizable compression ... this is cool as now people can do bzip/gzip/whatever the downside is that it breaks with packages that assume everything is compressed with gzip ... so here is a list of common things ebuilds should not be doing: doman foo.1.gz dosym foo.1.gz /usr/share/man/man1/fooie.1.gz dodoc README.gz etc... -mike pgpPCrF4H48FM.pgp Description: PGP signature
