Re: httpfs, tarfs --help

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 06:08:25PM +0000, Adam Olsen wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 05:02:52PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 03:34:02PM +0000, Adam Olsen wrote:
> > > 3) as 2, but triggered when you you have a "foo.tar.gz" file and try
> > > to open "foo".  Probably useful when other programs recognise the .gz
> > > extension and try to open it as a zip file.  (well, I suppose the
> > > dir/file distinction would protect foo.tar.gz files, but plain foo.gz
> > > files would still be vulnerable)
> > 
> > I think letting the translator do it is the Right Way. Implementing gzip
> > in every application is useless anyhow IMHO. So I think we should fix
> > the apps. :)
> 
> There's two ways for an app to support gzipped files:
> a) within the app itself, by recognising files with a .gz extension
> b) using a translator
> 
> You can't use the translator *all* the time, because you may want to
> manipulate the gzipped file itself.  And doing it in the app has to be
> duplicated for every app.  Therefore there IS no "right way".  Do
> whatever is most convenient.

You are right. But it is still possible in the tarfs case. If you want
to manipulate the file, you edit foo.tar. If you want the directory
tree, it's foo.tar/.

> > > More important than if you *can* make it transparent, is if you *want*
> > > to make it transparent.  But I think it's definetely worth
> > > implimenting.
> > 
> > I think there are a lot of people who will use it. Just think about it:
> > download a tarball, cd into it, build the program and install it. With
> > or without the option of storing the changes in the tarball itself (You
> > could make some kind of shadowfs thing). People who dislike it can
> > always turn it off, so that's no problem. We should also be sure to make
> > it secure.
> 
> I agree.  Btw, naming a non-gzipped file .gz breaks opening them with
> vim, and presumably every other app that already supports gzipped
> files.  Being compatable is very important.

That's just stupid, if they can't uncompress the file they should show
the raw data IMHO. But as usual people don't think like I do and being
compatible is indeed important. But we still can use it in the tarfs
case I think.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: jeroen@openprojects.net

pgpD53ptv99yd.pgp
Description: PGP signature