Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469134 --- Comment #7 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <orcanbahri@xxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-01 13:00:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > Created an attachment (id=325238) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=325238) [details] > Simplify specfile > > Here's a patch that simplifies the specfile somewhat, works for me on F-9. I > don't think it's necessary to change anything else but [ and \ to ?. > Thanks a lot for the patch! > Regarding the default dependencies: I can see the point for gzipped tarballs > and friends, the nested logic would indeed be ugly and possibly fragile. But > I'd still trim at least gzip and bzip2 from the list (ditto maybe cpio; I > suppose deco has no support for compressed cpio files) - the logic for handling > those is already there in for example 7zip and lzma cases as long as we can > assume tar is around. But I won't consider this a blocker if you don't agree. > > But if you decide to keep the defaults, I suppose there's no need to do the > symlinking for the defaults - their dirs could be simply directly installed to > /var/lib/deco instead, no? The thing is; the rpm extractor, for instance, requires the presence of dd (coreutils), gunzip, bzip2, tar, cpio and rpm. The current list of default archivers is minimal. If we reduce the number of default archivers, we will need to go to nested logic. The only exception is rpm, but that is installed in probably 100-10^{-5} % of the Fedora systems. I can still take it out if you change your mind. And yes, we can install the default archivers directly in /var/lib/deco/ . But the makefile script installs everything in one location and I would need to move them around manually. No biggie... But I think what I did is neat because, right now, one can see all the possible extraction scripts in one directory, and the symlinks don't occupy much of a harddrive space. Here are the latest files: SPEC: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/deco-archive.spec SRPM: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/deco-archive-1.2-6.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review