[tex-live] volunteer to implement lcab compression?
Thomas J. Kacvinsky
tjk at ams.org
Tue Jun 8 21:33:12 CEST 2004
Personally, I like the .pkg format of MacOS X with its BOM (bill of
materials, giving us the granularity we need for permissions of
files/directories), and its use of pax. Only problem is that the
BOM format doesn't support LFS. Not that we have a 4 GB file in
And it so happens thaat mkbom and pax are part of *BSD variants, so
the source code is out there (to be ported to whichever platforms).
Or are we looking at CAB files for the MSI installer Fabrice is
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Olaf Weber wrote:
> Manfred Lotz writes:
> > On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 19:33:55 +0200
> > Thomas Esser <te at dbs.uni-hannover.de> wrote:
> >>> We (Sebastian and I) have not found any other programs to write .cab
> >>> files under Unix (many programs support reading .cab's). There is a
> >> Is the file format good enough to preserve file attributes such as
> >> UNIX permissions?
> > Cab format is intended for Windows platform. Therefore it doesn't know
> > about permissions and ownership.
> The format allows for additional data to be stored per cab file header
> (CFHEADER), folder header (CFFOLDER), and data block (CFDATA), but not
> per file header (CFFILE).
> However, the additional data in a folder header is the same size for
> all folders in the CAB file. And the same goes for the additional
> data per data block.
> A data block can contain data of more than one file.
> All of which taken together means that there is no really suitable
> place to put additional per-file data in a CAB file -- you'd have to
> resort to indirect methods like packaging an additional "file" with
> the data.
> In all it is not a very good distribution format for unix-like
> >> Is the file format smart enough to handle text files
> >> properly(i.e. convert line ends on extraction)?
> > I'd say yes because CABARC.EXE seems to treat files as binary.
> Um, this means "no" as Thomas was asking about automatic translation
> of NL to CRNL or CR, and all that. And the answer is that for CAB
> extractors the CAB file really contains a number of bytestreams, which
> are not interpreted or changed. (Personally, I like that.)
> Basically, CAB does some tricks to get better compression than ZIP
> will for the case with many small files, and is as far as I can tell
> about equal on large files.
> Olaf Weber
> (This space left blank for technical reasons.)
> TeX Live mailing list
More information about the tex-live