Re: avoid warnings about slice vs. base name in single slice mode

>>> On 31/07/2019 19:59, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>>>> is it possible to avoid warnings about "seems more to be a slice name
>>>> than a base name." when slice size is not defined?

>On 04.08.19 11:55, Denis Corbin wrote: 
>>> this warning shows anytime you provide a filename "archive.1.dar" when 
>>> a archive basename "archive" is expected. It is not linked to the 
>>> slicing scheme you want to use.

>>> for example do not use: 
>>> dar -l archive.1.dar 
>>> but rather use
>>> dar -l archive 

>>> may there be one or many slices (archive.1.dar, archive.2.dar, 
>>> archive.3.dar, ...), these are all part of the achive which basename 
>>> is "archive" 

>On 04/08/2019 12:53, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>> I understand this, but when using filename completion, full names are
>> given.
>> (I don't want to play with bash and its completion functions).
>> What I meant was, if the warning could be avoided when no slicing scheme
>> is used, which is I believe most common -

On 04.08.19 19:06, Denis Corbin wrote:
>To my point of view this is rather the opposite: the use of slicing is
>very common, though I have no statistical data to base my argumentation
>on, this is however one of the value of dar to be very flexible in that
>area. This allows one to create huge archives much larger than what the
>underlying filesystem can support (FAT, ISO and other ancient
>filesystems still in use today)

>> so we could use full filenames and not care about slices and their extensions.

>I often had problems with softwares that pretend to "help" the user and
>fix its mistake without asking or telling what it did.
>- - who never lost his time removing uppercase from text editor while
>they never typed them nor ever wanted them?
>- - who never removed a smiley icon from his SMS/mail to put pack the
>expected punctuation or to type back in place the wanted text smiley?
>- - fetch an important mail in the spambox...?
>- - or even get confused by your intelligent car that will put packing
>break, stop the motor, switch off light at the worse time...?
>- - not to mention GPS navigator...
>- - ...and other "Artificially Intelligent" said solutions/devices :-)
>
>That said, I can't warranty that nobody ever created a dar archive made
>of slices like archive.1000.dar.1.dar, archive.1000.dar.2.dar,....
>automatically stripping the .<n>.dar of archive argument instead of
>asking as of today could lead to even more confusion...

I understand your objections. I met most of those.

>The only thing I can do it adding (yet) a new option to change this
>warning behavior to an automatic stripping behavior. But it will not be
>activated by default (though you could add it in your .darrc file to
>forget about it).
>
>OK for you?
>If so, please fill a feature request at
>https://sourceforge.net/p/dar/feature-requests/

been there, done that, thank you.

The option would be ignored if '-s' option is used (maybe with non-zero
value, how does dar handle this case?)

the option would expect full file names when creating or reading/updating
archives.

autodection of slices when archive to be opened doesn't exist would be
usefull though.

-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, [email protected] ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.