[Xfce4-commits] r22552 - xarchiver/branches/xarchiver-psybsd/libxarchiver

Stephan Arts psybsd at gmail.com
Sun Aug 6 01:26:15 CEST 2006

On 8/1/06, Benedikt Meurer <benedikt.meurer at unix-ag.uni-siegen.de> wrote:
> Stephan Arts wrote:
> >>The library is under a BSD license, so you can easily include it in
> >>xarchiver tarball and use the included version if the system is missing
> >>a copy of libarchive or its header files.
> >
> > With some small modifications to libxarchiver (a support-object must
> > be able to handle multiple archive-types), i should be able to create
> > a libarchive support object. This way it is possible to choose between
> > both approaches. If you do not want it's dependency (more
> > specifically, the libbz2 dependency, which is not installed by default
> > on most systems), it won't use it (for *.bz2) and it will fall back to
> > it's current behaviour.
> libbz2 should be available on nearly every system today, because bzip2
> is usually not statically linked. So, I guess you are talking about the
> header files.
> > For the rest of the application the interface remains the same.
> >
> > Though i am not sure it is a good practice to stick to libxarchiver.
> > It has tackled most design issues coming from the use of external
> > archivers, but with the introduction of libarchive it might be too
> > much overhead.
> >
> > Do you have any suggestions about this?
> You'll still need external archivers for formats not yet supported by
> libarchive. I think a libxarchive is still a good idea, so other
> applications can handle archives w/o having to implement the stuff
> themselves (for example the thunar-sendto plugin could use libxarchiver
> in the future).

I am thinking about using libthunar-vfs too, mainly because of the
MIME-database support. Using MIME directly will result in a
transparent interface for libarchive and the different archivers.

What do you think about this?

> Benedikt


More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list