On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Laslo Hunhold <d...@frign.de> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 15:15:21 +0300 > Jalal Almutawa <jalal.almut...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hey Jalal, > >> As a newcomer who have seen the problems that your philosophy >> addresses myself, I took a look at ways to get involved, and saw this >> listed project idea to extend sltar with bzip2 and gzip functionality. > > oh yeah, the project idea page needs a makeover. This has already been > done in sbase tar[0]. > What do you guys think? Imho, we should get rid of sltar. Any > objections? > >> I started to give it a shot, and then got a bit confused as to why >> this is required, since one can pipe the resulting tar to any >> compression tool instead of making sltar bigger by incorporating this >> functionality in the code. This will also leave the floor open to the >> users to pick the compression tool they like, instead of having to >> choose from bundled options. > > That's exactly what we did in the end. :) > > Cheers > > Laslo > > [0]: http://git.suckless.org/sbase/tree/tar.c > > -- > Laslo Hunhold <d...@frign.de> >
I agree sltar could be removed, atleast from the project idea page (it could stay in the git repo for now). As for extending tar with gzip and bzip2 support: it is already supported as a filtertool, which is the UNIX way (tm)(r)(c). Kind regards, Hiltjo
