On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Laslo Hunhold <dev_AT_frign.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 15:15:21 +0300
> Jalal Almutawa <jalal.almutawa_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Jalal,
>
>> As a newcomer who have seen the problems that your philosophy
>> addresses myself, I took a look at ways to get involved, and saw this
>> listed project idea to extend sltar with bzip2 and gzip functionality.
>
> oh yeah, the project idea page needs a makeover. This has already been
> done in sbase tar[0].
> What do you guys think? Imho, we should get rid of sltar. Any
> objections?
>
>> I started to give it a shot, and then got a bit confused as to why
>> this is required, since one can pipe the resulting tar to any
>> compression tool instead of making sltar bigger by incorporating this
>> functionality in the code. This will also leave the floor open to the
>> users to pick the compression tool they like, instead of having to
>> choose from bundled options.
>
> That's exactly what we did in the end. :)
>
> Cheers
>
> Laslo
>
> [0]: http://git.suckless.org/sbase/tree/tar.c
>
> --
> Laslo Hunhold <dev_AT_frign.de>
>
I agree sltar could be removed, atleast from the project idea page (it
could stay in the git repo for now).
As for extending tar with gzip and bzip2 support: it is already
supported as a filtertool, which is the UNIX way (tm)(r)(c).
Kind regards,
Hiltjo
Received on Fri Feb 10 2017 - 14:04:49 CET