[LoN]Kamikaze wrote:
Garrett Cooper wrote:
Pardon me for being naive, but wouldn't it be wiser for all of the data
in the +CONTENTS file to be aggregated into sections instead of having
line by line info?
Example (net/samba_3.0.25a):
@comment MD5:9e94560ac5e757d3bc5f922dcf3ab4fb
man/man1/log2pcap.1.gz
[~100 lines of repetitive data...]
@comment MD5:9f5fc8df2a1383a175e165ef2e0b10cc
man/man8/vfs_notify_fam.8.gz
Could be aggregated into:
@MD5
9e94560ac5e757d3bc5f922dcf3ab4fb man/man1/log2pcap.1.gz
c58f068d603a12d4af867c15cf77e636 man/man1/nmblookup.1.gz
[etc..]
@end MD5
or something similar to XML.
This would reduce the filesize from n bytes to n - (9 + 4 -1) *
i_entries + 8. In larger package files this would reduce the amount of
data parsing by a long shot. Also, more powerful scripting languages
like Perl, Python, or smart parsers in C could make short work of this
data and just extract the MD5 elements for comparison.
Also, by doing a little extra work when creating packages by
organizing all the sections together, I think that the file size could
be reduced by a large degree.
Similar fields to @comment MD5 could be reduced I believe, but with
less benefit maybe, other than just the @unexec rmdir, etc lines.
Either that, or the data should be organized into separate files I
think (increases number of files, but reduces overall processing time IMO).
Thanks,
-Garrett
In some cases the order of data stored is important and thus it cannot be
seperated into section. Also, this layout allows for very simple parsing with
usual UNIX tools (sed, cut, awk, perl, simply everything). Unlike XML, which is
rather complex and thus does not belong into base, in my opinion.
I didn't say XML exactly. I say XML-like, with implied end and begin
tags, but keeping with the Makefile like syntax of @MD5 ... @end MD5, or
something similar.
The only plus I can see is from cut, but I would think that sed,
awk, and perl would work much better with a revised format..
My point being is that the +CONTENTS file is bloated a lot by
useless lines, and it would help speed up package processing if it was
clipped or reduced somehow I would think.
Plus, expat's MIT license, which I believe is compatible with the
BSD license (or more compatible than the GPL variants). The only
difference that stands out on the MIT license from what I can tell is
paragraph 3 in the BSD license isn't present.
-Garrett
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
