tbz or tbz2

[Juan Manuel Palacios]

On Feb 28, 2007, at 6:29 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:

> I was messing around with the portarchivetype option today and tried  
> to set it to tbz2 according to ports.conf, but the resulting files,  
> while ending in .tbz2, were not:
>
> /opt/local/var/db/dports/packages/darwin/i386/coreutils 
> -6.7_1+with_default_names.i386.tbz2:    POSIX tar archive


	This is because the switch statement taking care of setting up the  
archive type does not support a "bz2" ending for our tar based archives  
(as I'm sure you know by now if you read the proper source file, I'm  
just pasting here for discussion's sake ;-):

in base/src/package1.0/portarchive.tcl:

proc archive_command_setup {args} {
	(snip)
	switch -regex ${archive.type} {
		(snip)
		t(ar|bz|gz) {
			(snip)
			if {[regexp {z$} ${archive.type}]} {
				(snip)
			}
		}
	}
}

	That '$' in "z$" kills our ability to handle "z2" as an extension  
ending, thus eliminating the possibility of dealing with either tbz or  
tbz2 named archives. "archivemode" having been questioned extensively  
before, I still say we fix this (in my opinion) rather important  
omission: personally, I would move from "tbz" to "tbz2" as I believe  
the latter is much more common; but I can understand how that would  
disrupt a maybe large portion if the user base already using "tbz", so  
instead I say we make room for both:

- t(ar|bz|gz) {
+ t(ar|bz|bz2|gz) {

- if {[regexp {z$} ${archive.type}]} {
+ if {[regexp {z2?$} ${archive.type}]} {

- if {[regexp {bz$} ${archive.type}]} {
+ if {[regexp {bz2?$} ${archive.type}]} {

(changes tested and working)

>
> So the code looks a little fragile in that it does regex matching on  
> the names to determine which archiver and compressor to use.  It also  
> doesn't cover misspelled settings


	The "default" clause should cover them as errors in the ports.conf  
setting, prompting users to correct them, which seems sane to me.

>
> So a couple of things:
>
> 1) Should we decide on a standard tbz or tbz2?  We should have the  
> documentation match the code.


	My changes above should allow for both "tbz" and "tbz2", allowing the  
user to choose his/her favorite. If checked in, we would also patch  
documentation to list both options (cf. your r22465 commit). Opinions?


> 2) Have to code check for all valid types instead of trying regexps on  
> them?


	Maybe a tad too stringent....? Did you detect any errors (other than  
the one discussed here) in checking for supported archive types?

>
> Thanks,
> Blair
>


	Thanks for bringing this up! Regards,..


-jmpp


PS: Truth be told, I think we should move to the by far much more  
standard "*.tar.gz" & "*.tar.bz2" naming convention, but I don't think  
many would care enough about "archivemode" to even dig into it to  
determine the effects such move would have. Do you? Hint, hint... ;-)