Andreas Metzler wrote: > "Ying-Chun Liu (PaulLiu)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> LZH is an archive format which is generated by the lha utility (1). >> This format is still popular in Japan, but the lha utility is not a free >> software. However, some free softwares which use LZH as their >> data format (2) and some free GUI archive file managers (3) >> often use fork+exec, popen, or system, to call the >> command line program '/usr/bin/lha' to extract the data. > >> Therefore I propose a virtual package named 'lha' for those packages who can >> provide the functionality of '/usr/bin/lha'. > >> Note: >> (1) "lha" package in Debian non-free section >> (2) "fkiss", "gnomekiss" in Debian >> (3) "ark", "file-roller", "krusader" in Debian > > Do all these packages accept a common (sub)set of commandline options? > Alternatives only work if the commandline interface is compatible. > cu andreas
Yes, all these packages should have a common (sub)set of commandline
options. I think that's the word "suitable" means.
I'm packaging jlha-utils (RFS, not in Debian). It is command-line
compatible and provides the subset of the options. Since there's no spec
on how these options work, and for clean-room purpose, we can't read the
non-free source code. We can only guess from outside and implement them
by ourselves. And thus we can't guarantee that it is 100% same as the
original 'lha'. But I've tested it with the programs (2,3) listed above.
regards,
Ying-Chun Liu
--
PaulLiu(劉穎駿)
E-mail address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
