[Build-common-hackers] Adding support for xz compression in upstream-tarball.mk

Vasudev Kamath kamathvasudev at gmail.com
Tue Feb 12 07:47:06 UTC 2013

Hello CDBS Hackers,

I filed a bug[1] yesterday requesting to add support for tar.xz compression
in upstream-tarball.mk.

I was looking at fixing the issue myself and also fixed it by adding
tar.xz in below snippet

	case "$(cdbs_upstream_received_tarball)" in \
	    *.tar.gz)  unpack="gunzip -c";; \
	    *.tar.bz2) unpack="bunzip2 -c"; grep -q '3.0 (quilt)' debian/source/format || uncompress="bunzip2";; \
	    *.tar.xz)  unpack="xz -dc";; \
	    *.tar.Z)   unpack="uncompress -c"; uncompress="uncompress";; \
	    *.zip)     unpack="unzip -q";      uncompress="false";       untar="-d"; nopipe="true";; \
	    *.tar)     unpack="cat";           uncompress="true";; \
	    *) echo "Unknown extension for upstream tarball $(cdbs_upstream_received_tarball)"; false;; \

But I noticed that in case of repackaging the source upstream-tarball
blindly uses gzip compression. If upstream has provided source tarball
in xz compression wouldn't this be wrong thing to do? In general isn't
it nice to use the source tar in same file format as upstream gives them?

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/700321

Best Regards
Vasudev Kamath
Connect on ~friendica: copyninja@{frndk.de | vasudev.homelinux.net}
IRC nick: copyninja | vasudev {irc.oftc.net | irc.freenode.net}
GPG Key: C517 C25D E408 759D 98A4  C96B 6C8F 74AE 8770 0B7E
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/build-common-hackers/attachments/20130212/980f66b4/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Build-common-hackers mailing list