Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-13 Thread Todd C . Miller
On Sun, 13 Mar 2022 13:26:13 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > Works fine. Here's an updated diff with suggestions: > - "k" was not completely removed from compress's struct compressor opt > string, and was not needed in null_method > - try to keep the *flag variables ordered > - rework

Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-13 Thread Jeremie Courreges-Anglas
On Sat, Mar 12 2022, Solene Rapenne wrote: > On Sat, 12 Mar 2022 15:49:40 +0100 > Solene Rapenne : > >> On Sat, 05 Mar 2022 19:15:02 -0700 >> "Todd C. Miller" : >> >> > On Sun, 06 Mar 2022 02:58:30 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: >> > >> > > I'm not sure what you mean here. Solene's

Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-12 Thread Solene Rapenne
On Sat, 05 Mar 2022 19:15:02 -0700 "Todd C. Miller" : > On Sun, 06 Mar 2022 02:58:30 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > > > I'm not sure what you mean here. Solene's diff added -k to both > > compress(1) and gzip(1) (and their uncompressor counterparts). > > Adding -k to gzip/gunzip only

Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-05 Thread Theo de Raadt
Todd C. Miller wrote: > On Sun, 06 Mar 2022 02:58:30 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > > > I'm not sure what you mean here. Solene's diff added -k to both > > compress(1) and gzip(1) (and their uncompressor counterparts). > > Adding -k to gzip/gunzip only would indeed make the usage()

Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-05 Thread Todd C . Miller
On Sun, 06 Mar 2022 02:58:30 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > I'm not sure what you mean here. Solene's diff added -k to both > compress(1) and gzip(1) (and their uncompressor counterparts). > Adding -k to gzip/gunzip only would indeed make the usage() slightly > more complicated. > > So

Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-05 Thread Jeremie Courreges-Anglas
On Thu, Mar 03 2022, Todd C. Miller wrote: > On Thu, 03 Mar 2022 15:11:13 +, Miod Vallat wrote: > >> > I think this makes sense if only for better GNU gzip compatibility. >> > OK millert@ >> >> But does the `-k' flag needs to be added to compress(1) too? > > No, it just makes usage() slightly

Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-03 Thread Todd C . Miller
On Thu, 03 Mar 2022 15:11:13 +, Miod Vallat wrote: > > I think this makes sense if only for better GNU gzip compatibility. > > OK millert@ > > But does the `-k' flag needs to be added to compress(1) too? No, it just makes usage() slightly more complicated. But that diff was missing an update

Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-03 Thread Miod Vallat
> I think this makes sense if only for better GNU gzip compatibility. > OK millert@ But does the `-k' flag needs to be added to compress(1) too?

Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-03 Thread Todd C . Miller
On Thu, 03 Mar 2022 13:13:16 +0100, Solene Rapenne wrote: > The following diff adds support for -k flag to keep the input file for > gzip / compress when compressing, and the input file (the compressed > one) for gunzip / uncompress > > This will improve uses cases like: zcat -f "${file}" >

Re: add -k / --keep for gzip(1)

2022-03-03 Thread Jonathan Gray
On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 01:13:16PM +0100, Solene Rapenne wrote: > The following diff adds support for -k flag to keep the input file for > gzip / compress when compressing, and the input file (the compressed > one) for gunzip / uncompress what case is not covered by -c > file ? > > This will