[lsb-discuss] archive format
dank at kegel.com
Mon Mar 10 13:41:40 PST 2003
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 lsb-discuss-admin at freestandards.org 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Good idea as CPIO is now called an outdated format from POSIX.1-2001.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.
More information about the lsb-discuss