14 Oct
2005
14 Oct
'05
1:08 p.m.
Alfons Adriaensen <fons.adriaensen(a)alcatel.be> writes:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 10:12:22AM +0100, Steve Harris
wrote:
I dont think you really need worry about accidental errors. Just
make the actual format used obscure enough for the average user...
I know that .deb packages can be built/extracted using ar since
years, but I never really did it if not necessary since the tools
available for doing it the proper way are sufficient :-)
However, its just cool if you happen to end up in a situation where you
need some bits of the data in one of your files, but for some reason or another
dont have your application handy on the machine right now.
--
CYa,
Mario
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 08:08:22 -0400, Paul
Davis wrote:
Reading tar files directly is easy enough - emacs does it for example.
Any libs for jar / xpi ? My main objection to both would probably be that
it's just a bit too easy to create them using 'general' tools only.
I want to avoid incompatible parts being put together accidentally.
That's also the main reason for preferring a single file over a directory. On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 01:02 +0200, fons
adriaensen wrote:
Actually a zip file plus manifest (aka jar or mozilla xpi) is an ok
solution, they can be "mounted" by the application and have files pulled
out, whereas tar files have to be unpacked to /tmp or similar. The alternative is of course to have separate WAV
files and some
text file for the metadata, and combine all of this into a directory
that would then be handled as a unit. But I'd prefer to have all
data in a single file.
tar? (paul runs for cover ...)