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
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
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
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()
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
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
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
> 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?
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}" >
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
10 matches
Mail list logo