[arch-general] xarchiver patch
Hello, I have patched extra/xarchiver to support xz compression using Slackware's patch. It is working on my system, and I uploaded it to AUR: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45726 What is the procedure of requesting it to be applied to original package? Ivan
On 26.01.2011 20:11, Ivan Puntiy wrote:
Hello,
I have patched extra/xarchiver to support xz compression using Slackware's patch. It is working on my system, and I uploaded it to AUR: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45726
What is the procedure of requesting it to be applied to original package?
Ivan You should always try to get patches upstream.
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 21:11 +0200, Ivan Puntiy wrote:
Hello,
I have patched extra/xarchiver to support xz compression using Slackware's patch. It is working on my system, and I uploaded it to AUR: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45726
What is the procedure of requesting it to be applied to original package?
Ivan
Feature request, but first bug upstream -- Jelle van der Waa
2011/1/26 Jelle van der Waa <jelle@vdwaa.nl>
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 21:11 +0200, Ivan Puntiy wrote:
Hello,
I have patched extra/xarchiver to support xz compression using Slackware's patch. It is working on my system, and I uploaded it to AUR: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45726
What is the procedure of requesting it to be applied to original package?
Ivan
Feature request, but first bug upstream -- Jelle van der Waa
Ok, I actually found the patch at upstream's bug about the issue (opened since 2009). But rechecked now: the patch was added 2 months ago in a comment, I guess I can wait. And for the future: Are feature request are submitted at the bug tracker?
On 26.01.2011 20:29, Ivan Puntiy wrote:
2011/1/26 Jelle van der Waa <jelle@vdwaa.nl>
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 21:11 +0200, Ivan Puntiy wrote:
Hello,
I have patched extra/xarchiver to support xz compression using Slackware's patch. It is working on my system, and I uploaded it to AUR: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45726
What is the procedure of requesting it to be applied to original package?
Ivan Feature request, but first bug upstream -- Jelle van der Waa
Ok, I actually found the patch at upstream's bug about the issue (opened since 2009). But rechecked now: the patch was added 2 months ago in a comment, I guess I can wait.
And for the future: Are feature request are submitted at the bug tracker? You should bug upstream against, perhaps using direct mail to maintainer.
In general, you can post up feature requests but they might be closed with "upstream" as a reason as we can't do much about it. We will not have feature patches in 99% of the cases if it can be helped.
2011/1/26 Sven-Hendrik Haase <sh@lutzhaase.com>
2011/1/26 Jelle van der Waa <jelle@vdwaa.nl>
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 21:11 +0200, Ivan Puntiy wrote:
Hello,
I have patched extra/xarchiver to support xz compression using Slackware's patch. It is working on my system, and I uploaded it to AUR: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45726
What is the procedure of requesting it to be applied to original
On 26.01.2011 20:29, Ivan Puntiy wrote: package?
Ivan
Feature request, but first bug upstream -- Jelle van der Waa
Ok, I actually found the patch at upstream's bug about the issue (opened since 2009). But rechecked now: the patch was added 2 months ago in a comment, I guess I can wait.
And for the future: Are feature request are submitted at the bug tracker? You should bug upstream against, perhaps using direct mail to maintainer.
In general, you can post up feature requests but they might be closed with "upstream" as a reason as we can't do much about it. We will not have feature patches in 99% of the cases if it can be helped.
Ok, thanks.
Am Wed, 26 Jan 2011 20:35:51 +0100 schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haase <sh@lutzhaase.com>:
You should bug upstream against, perhaps using direct mail to maintainer.
In general, you can post up feature requests but they might be closed with "upstream" as a reason as we can't do much about it. We will not have feature patches in 99% of the cases if it can be helped.
You seem to be able to read my mind? Yes, I'd close it as won't implement. Though it would be really useful it's simply against Arch philosophy as it would add unneeded code to the upstream release. -Andy
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 21:04 +0100, Andreas Radke wrote:
Am Wed, 26 Jan 2011 20:35:51 +0100 schrieb Sven-Hendrik Haase <sh@lutzhaase.com>:
You should bug upstream against, perhaps using direct mail to maintainer.
In general, you can post up feature requests but they might be closed with "upstream" as a reason as we can't do much about it. We will not have feature patches in 99% of the cases if it can be helped.
You seem to be able to read my mind? Yes, I'd close it as won't implement. Though it would be really useful it's simply against Arch philosophy as it would add unneeded code to the upstream release.
Depends on what you call unneeded. If I would add support for additional compression formats, I would just rewrite a big piece of the code to use either bsdtar instead of parsing output from tar and unzip. File-roller is very famous for its error messages about .tar.gz files that have been un-gzipped by your browser, but which are stored with the same extension. As tar will complain that it's not a gzip archive, file-roller can't open it... The same will be true for xarchiver.
2011/1/26 Ivan Puntiy <ivan.puntiy@gmail.com>
Hello,
I have patched extra/xarchiver to support xz compression using Slackware's patch. It is working on my system, and I uploaded it to AUR: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45726
What is the procedure of requesting it to be applied to original package?
Ivan
I take my words back, just found a bug with the patch: looks like it only allows to see the contents of xz archive.
participants (5)
-
Andreas Radke
-
Ivan Puntiy
-
Jan de Groot
-
Jelle van der Waa
-
Sven-Hendrik Haase