>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Stone <mst...@debian.org> writes:
Michael> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 05:18:18AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: >> be updated anyway to support any new format. It also destroys >> some of the nice properties of the 2.x format, namely: >> >> - Not requiring special tools to build/extract. Michael> This is really not a property worth preserving. I think it Michael> would be fairly easy to get significant performance Michael> improvements if we dropped the archive nesting, and all it Michael> would cost is losing a bullet point that nobody really Michael> cares about all that much. I remember when this was one of Michael> the "reasons" to advocate .deb over .rpm but in the real Michael> world people just apt install rpm and the anecdotes about Michael> this one time somebody wanted to unpack a deb on an ancient Michael> sunos box aren't worth slowing down every install until the Michael> end of time. I've certainly heard people describe our use of both ar and tar as an architectural minus especially on embedded platforms just because the dependency set of dpkg needed to be larger. I don't know how big of a concern that still is, but it does seem strange to use multiple different archiving technologies in the same format today.