From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Miles Bader Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] archive: support gzipped tar files Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:40:22 +0900 Message-ID: <87vcw8f0d5.fsf@catnip.gol.com> References: <20110614181732.GA31635@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20110614181821.GA32685@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vaadkkvew.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20110614204950.GB12776@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?Q?R?= =?utf-8?Q?en=C3=A9?= Scharfe , git-dev@github.com To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 15 01:49:38 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QWdMY-0007Y3-Hc for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 01:49:38 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752321Ab1FNXtd (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:49:33 -0400 Received: from smtp12.dentaku.gol.com ([203.216.5.74]:54584 "EHLO smtp12.dentaku.gol.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752150Ab1FNXtd (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:49:33 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 535 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:49:33 EDT Received: from 218.231.154.3.eo.eaccess.ne.jp ([218.231.154.3] helo=catnip.gol.com) by smtp12.dentaku.gol.com with esmtpa (Dentaku) (envelope-from ) id 1QWdDc-0003Fh-0O; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:40:24 +0900 Received: by catnip.gol.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 288D2DF8D; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:40:23 +0900 (JST) System-Type: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: <20110614204950.GB12776@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:49:50 -0400") X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV GOL (outbound) X-Abuse-Complaints: abuse@gol.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: >> I didn't know it was that easy (primarily because I didn't know zlib had a >> ready-to-eat interface to do this). > > Yes, though I think it may be worth doing the more flexible, > external-filters approach. See elsewhere in the thread. Given the relatively trivial code, isn't it worth doing both...? One method for flexibility/multi-threaded-speed, the other for portability/robustness (doesn't depend on configuration / setup details)... -Miles -- "Though they may have different meanings, the cries of 'Yeeeee-haw!' and 'Allahu akbar!' are, in spirit, not actually all that different."