Andreas Metzler wrote:
> "Ying-Chun Liu (PaulLiu)" <grandpaul@gmail.com> wrote:
>> LZH is an archive format which is generated by the lha utility (1).
>> This format is still popular in Japan, but the lha utility is not a free
>> software. However, some free softwares which use LZH as their
>> data format (2) and some free GUI archive file managers (3)
>> often use fork+exec, popen, or system, to call the
>> command line program '/usr/bin/lha' to extract the data.
>
>> Therefore I propose a virtual package named 'lha' for those packages who can
>> provide the functionality of '/usr/bin/lha'.
>
>> Note:
>> (1) "lha" package in Debian non-free section
>> (2) "fkiss", "gnomekiss" in Debian
>> (3) "ark", "file-roller", "krusader" in Debian
>
> Do all these packages accept a common (sub)set of commandline options?
> Alternatives only work if the commandline interface is compatible.
> cu andreas
Yes, all these packages should have a common (sub)set of commandline
options. I think that's the word "suitable" means.
I'm packaging jlha-utils (RFS, not in Debian). It is command-line
compatible and provides the subset of the options. Since there's no spec
on how these options work, and for clean-room purpose, we can't read the
non-free source code. We can only guess from outside and implement them
by ourselves. And thus we can't guarantee that it is 100% same as the
original 'lha'. But I've tested it with the programs (2,3) listed above.
regards,
Ying-Chun Liu
--
PaulLiu(劉穎駿)
E-mail address: grandpaul@gmail.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature