| 1 |
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 10:55:50AM -0600, Lance Albertson wrote: |
| 2 |
> A few rough ideas that just popped in my |
| 3 |
> head is either packing all of these versions into one tarball (not even |
| 4 |
> sure if thats feasible) |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Ugly, binpkgs are bzip2ed tarballs + xpak at the end of the bzip2 |
| 7 |
stream, jamming multiple contents sets in would lose the ability to |
| 8 |
just untar the bugger to the fs in worst case. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Plus... it's nasty from a format standard, trying to determine which |
| 11 |
contents set to pull. Basically have to jump to eof, read the footer, |
| 12 |
either store _all_ offsets there (extension of xpak format), or jump |
| 13 |
from there to the previous xpak, repeat till you've found what you |
| 14 |
want. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> , or creating a hashed suffix based upon the |
| 17 |
> useflags enabled/disabled at the time that you append to the tarball name. |
| 18 |
+1 on mangling the name. Need something for keywords anyways. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Alternative is expanding the bintree format, cat/pkg-ver being a |
| 21 |
directory, with the binpkgs held with in... |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Either way, bintree/binpkg format are all rolled into one mess, as |
| 24 |
stated, open to proposals to make it less sucky. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
~harring |
Archives