| From: | David Trollope |
| Date: | 12 Sep 2000 at 02:29:50 |
| Subject: | Re: AMIOPEN: Compressed archive formats and Installers |
Hi Alexander,
>> I agree that a ZIP filesystem would be good, but since when
>> could you drop the filesystem in to a directory? and have it
>> work for any zip file? data types don't force you to create
>> a mount point, and mount the filesystem each time.
>
> The installer would know how to mount archive files (Zip or
> otherwise) at a temporary mount point. Might need an extra
> API call for program controlled mounting of archives.
This was the point, the OS should do this not the installer.
> Or maybe
> the OS can hide it - if you use directory calls (like
> "cd Archive.zip") on a Zip archive then the OS automatically
> mounts it and uses it as a directory, and unmounts it when no
> references remain. Hmmm, that would be cool.
Yes it would. Now where to plonk that filesystem code...
>> You just drop the datatype in to the dir, and AddDataType
>> ... Then any application that uses datatypes can read any
>> file from anywhere. What could be easier?
>
> Well, we'd need a similarly easy way of installing and finding
> new file systems. Maybe a directory containing the code for
> all the available file systems?
Perhaps, but if the icon has "AddDatatype" in the tooltype, you wouldn't
even have to rely on it being in any specific directory. You would just run
it. Of course, to have it automatically run on boot up a specific directory
would be needed.
>> Bah humbug to creating mount points per zip archive and
>> mounting it. They only get in the way when you forget to
>> delete them again after unmounting it of course. unmounting?
>
> The Installer would do all that for the user. The user just
>> points the Installer at the archive and lets it do the rest.
>
> One nice advantage of file systems is that you can distribute
> patches easily. If the Merge file system does what I think
> it does, you can Merge the original zip with the patch zip and
> the Installer doesn't have to do anything extra. The patch
> zip contains just replacements and new files overriding the
> original zip's files (uses same directory structure) and they
> get merged by the OS / filesystems.
At the expense of patch file size. I much prefer distributing tiny patch
files that run patch to modify the executable. Lets say you want to patch a
1 MB exe for 30 bytes??? Is redistributing 1 MB efficient? OK, before I get
flamed, you shouldn't have a 1MB tool.... but my point remains. It also
forces the user to have the right version to patch from, and this can
prevent wierd things happen when a stupid user gets hold of a patched
executable and tries to run it in the wrong environment.
Regards
Dave
Subscribe/Unsubscribe: open-request@amiga.com
Amiga FAQ: http://www.amiga.com/faq.html