Re: Changing the default .zoo extractor

[Thomas Klausner <wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 03:53:19PM +0200, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
> We have a few distfiles that need archives/zoo to unpack. However,
> archivers/zoo is dead upstream and has known exploitable bugs.
> 
> I have written my own implementation of Zoo as part of devel/objfw, which
> also comes with a command line util called ofarc using said implementation.
> I'd like to propose to switch the extractor for .zoo files over to
> devel/objfw. The downside is that devel/objfw has a dependency on clang
> right now, albeit being technically possible to build with GCC (with a
> reduced feature set, which breaks software out there needing those features
> - but we could add a separate "objfw-gcc" package or something that would
> have a fully working ofarc).
> 
> While at it, we could also switch over .lha to devel/objfw if we want to, as
> the current lha doesn't seem much maintained either and has a weird license
> that is only available in Japanese.
> 
> Thoughts?

For extractors we probably prefer fewer dependencies.
I'm not aware of zoo extractors at all.

Which packages are affected?
Can we switch them to non-zoo distfiles?

For lha, there's a archivers/lhasa, which is still actively maintained
and which has basically no dependencies; so if we switch, I'd prefer that.
 Thomas