[arch-general] xarchiver patch

[Jan de Groot]

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 at 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.