From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [found the culprit] Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 15:38:01 -0500 Message-ID: References: <875zx1xgiq.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <83lg5w9956.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0r76ewm.fsf_-_@mat.ucm.es> <87tvkjq2mh.fsf_-_@mat.ucm.es> <834lcj8y1f.fsf@gnu.org> <83sh0377n6.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1542227773 2682 195.159.176.226 (14 Nov 2018 20:36:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 20:36:13 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 14 21:36:08 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gN1tO-0000Yu-Rv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 21:36:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34133 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN1vV-00017e-Dy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 15:38:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58668) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN1vL-00017F-Ug for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 15:38:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN1vI-0002Xq-KQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 15:38:07 -0500 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:34259) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN1vI-0002XK-Fw; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 15:38:04 -0500 Original-Received: from pastel.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.7/8.14.1) with ESMTP id wAEKc1nU012709; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 15:38:01 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 949566835B; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 15:38:01 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <83sh0377n6.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 14 Nov 2018 21:59:09 +0200") X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 2 Rules triggered EDT_SA_DN_PASS=0, RV6418=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9418 : core <6418> : inlines <6959> : streams <1804273> : uri <2749680> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:231151 Archived-At: >> > I do think that Z on a compressed Tar archive, be it a .tar.gz or .tgz >> > file, should not by default unpack the archive. We could have a >> > special prefix arg to request that, and by default we should just >> > uncompress the file. But that's a different issue. >> >> FWIW, I consider ".tar.gz" (or "tar.lz", ...) as the archive format >> (rather than as a combination of tar and compression): since the tar >> format does not support random access anyway there's very little benefit >> to having it uncompressed (unless the content can't be compressed >> e.g. because it's already compressed). > > But then 'Z' shouldn't invoke unpacking, because it is documented as > "uncompress" operation. But if you consider ".tar.gz" in the same way as ".zip" (i.e. the compression is indivisible from the archiving), then does that mean you think it should signal an error when asked to uncompress such a file? AFAICT Emacs has unpacked .tar.gz when asked to uncompress them for many years and noone has complained about it so far. I think it's the most natural thing to do. The only recent change in this regard is to adjust the behavior on .tgz so it works like .tar.gz (the old behavior was really odd to me: the name ".tgz" even more strongly hints at the desire to treat archiving and compression as indivisible, so it was very strange for Emacs to only uncompress rather than unpack it when the same operation .tar.gz unpacked it). Stefan