Bug#378112: ITP: gzrt -- gzip recovery toolkit
Hi Paul, About your "intent to package": http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=378112 http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gzrt/ Have you noticed that there's a newer upstream release ? http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/hacking/gzrt/ Regards, Bart Martens signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#378112: ITP: gzrt -- gzip recovery toolkit
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Paul Wise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: gzrt Version : 0.4 Upstream Author : Aaron M. Renn * URL : http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/hacking/gzrt/ * License : GPL Programming Lang: C Description : gzip recovery toolkit gzrecover will attempt to skip over corrupted data in a gzip archive, thereby allowing the remaining data to be recovered. Please install cpio 2.5 or higher to facilitate recovery from damaged gzipped tarballs. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#378112: ITP: gzrt -- gzip recovery toolkit
On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 19:35 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > Please install cpio 2.5 or higher to facilitate recovery from damaged > gzipped tarballs. I will drop the version from the description and add cpio to the suggests. I added the suggestion to the description because I guess that .tar.gz will be the most common type of file being recovered and because suggests/recommends do not tell humans exactly how/why cpio is useful to install alongside gzrt. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#378112: ITP: gzrt -- gzip recovery toolkit
On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 13:14 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 19:35 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > > Please install cpio 2.5 or higher to facilitate recovery from damaged > > gzipped tarballs. > > I will drop the version from the description and add cpio to the > suggests. > > I added the suggestion to the description because I guess that .tar.gz > will be the most common type of file being recovered I agree that that is a common type of file to recover, so that would make it more appropriate to Recommend cpio rather than Suggest. Thijs signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#378112: ITP: gzrt -- gzip recovery toolkit
On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 10:11:41AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > On Sun, 2006-07-16 at 13:14 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > I will drop the version from the description and add cpio to the > > suggests. > > > > I added the suggestion to the description because I guess that .tar.gz > > will be the most common type of file being recovered > > I agree that that is a common type of file to recover, so that would > make it more appropriate to Recommend cpio rather than Suggest. "a common type"? Come on, that's not just "common", it's "a vast majority of cases". And, a hard Depend on a small priority=important package is not a big burden -- what about just having a dependency without the comment? -- 1KB // Microsoft corollary to Hanlon's razor: // Never attribute to stupidity what can be // adequately explained by malice. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#378112: Depends vs. Recommends (Was: Bug#378112: ITP: gzrt -- gzip recovery toolkit)
Jens Peter Secher cites Policy: > The Depends field should be used if the depended-on package is > required for the depending package to provide a significant > amount of functionality. It has been (somewhat convincingly) argued that repairing broken tar.gz is "a significant amount of functionality" a user gets from gzrt. Kind regards T. -- Thomas Viehmann, http://thomas.viehmann.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#378112: Depends vs. Recommends (Was: Bug#378112: ITP: gzrt -- gzip recovery toolkit)
Adam Borowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 10:11:41AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: >> >> I agree that that is a common type of file to recover, so that would >> make it more appropriate to Recommend cpio rather than Suggest. > > "a common type"? Come on, that's not just "common", it's "a vast > majority of cases". And, a hard Depend on a small priority=important > package is not a big burden -- what about just having a dependency > without the comment? No. And the reason can be found in Policy section 7.2: Depends This declares an absolute dependency. A package will not be configured unless all of the packages listed in its Depends field have been correctly configured. The Depends field should be used if the depended-on package is required for the depending package to provide a significant amount of functionality. The Depends field should also be used if the postinst, prerm or postrm scripts require the package to be present in order to run. Note, however, that the postrm cannot rely on any non-essential packages to be present during the purge phase. Recommends This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency. The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together with this one in all but unusual installations. The dependency system is used to make sure things don't break on the _system_ level. To ease upgrades, transitions, etc., dependencies (Depends) should be kept to the absolute minimum. Cheers, -- Jens Peter Secher _DD6A 05B0 174E BFB2 D4D9 B52E 0EE5 978A FE63 E8A1 jpsecher gmail com_ A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
