Re: Default compresssion format in pkgsrc & extensions

[Petar Bogdanovic <petar%smokva.net@localhost>]

On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 10:14:47PM -0400, William J. Coldwell wrote:
>
> On May 3, 2009, at 20:42, Alistair Crooks <agc%pkgsrc.org@localhost> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 04:02:02PM -0700, Jon Buller wrote:
>>> David Brownlee wrote:
>>>
>>>>   First, can we pick a standardised extension for binary packages
>>>>   which does not change whether the file is gzipped or bzipped?
>>>>   Something like .tpz? Exposing the compression format in the file
>>>>   extension is just confusing for no real benefit. It makes mixing
>>>>   packages with different formats problematic, and as a user of
>>>>   bzipped packages I've been bitten a few times when pkg_add has
>>>>   tried to look for a .tgz package as a remote dependency (though
>>>>   that may have been fixed now)
>>>
>>> Might I suggest something even more generic, like .pkg?
>>
>> I think this is an excellent idea - ".pkg" is by far the best suffix
>> -
>> it tells what it is, and doesn't expose any of the internals, and
>> won't get confused between naive personal archives of code.
>
> .pkg is already standard from NeXTstep to OpenStep to MacOSX

Why should that be a problem, if the mentioned suffix is not
associated with a broadly accepted mime-type?



   Petar Bogdanovic