Re: archive format
Dan Kegel <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.lsb.discuss |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Mike wins my vote - he's showing himself to be a sensible and pragmatic radical :-) Mike Hearn wrote: > I think the focus is going to be (at least i hope it will be) on > standardising certain key parts of the system rather than attempting to > design and then mandate a new format. If a new format is created at some > point in the future, if we've done our jobs right it should be able to > nicely integrate with the current, existing systems. > > Because really, although I agree in principle, there are lots of RPMs > out there and they're not going to go away. So we need to account for > all these kinds of packages. > > thanks -mike > > On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 15:08, Joerg Schilling wrote: > >>>From [email protected] Fri Mar 7 03:07:03 2003 >> >> >>>How about making mutated cpio's just a recommended archive format, >>>rather than a required one. >> >>Good idea as CPIO is now called an outdated format from POSIX.1-2001. >> >>TAR + extended headers (supported by star ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/star) >>is the official standard archive format of the future. -- Dan Kegel http://www.kegel.com http://counter.li.org/cgi-bin/runscript/display-person.cgi?user=78045