On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 10:15:31PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > I guess what I'm asking is, why are tar and other applications using > gzip instead of a generic library that handles all > compression/decompression and can be easily extended.
General complexity, I'd guess. If you want “easily extended”, you'll have to cope with dynamic, shared libraries -- look to NSS for a case on how evil that can get. (And tar is really something you'd like to stay small and simple.) Also, having to hunt down the right plug-in module for whatever format somebody had the bright idea to use at some point can be a real pain. (Ever had to use one of those “codec packs” for Micosoft Windows?) Besides, UNIX does this a different way, traditionally -- via separate programs. “gzip -d file.tar.gz ; tar xf file.tar” gives you most of the same functionality, with zero extra complexity. (Try --use-compress-program in GNU tar, but that probably doesn't exist in anything else.) /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
