Dne 12.2.2014 14:31, Pierre-Yves Chibon napsal(a):
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 01:47:08PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 12.2.2014 12:44, Matthew Miller napsal(a):
>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 09:46:27AM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>>> So Ralph and I wrote summershum, it's a simple database storing for each
>>> each package:
>>> - the packages name
>>> - the filename
>>> - the sha1sum of the file
>>> - the tarball name
>>> - the md5sum of the tarball
>>> - a creation date
>> So, I have one small suggestion and one possibly-too ambitious one.
>> The small one is that it might be nice to include the output of `file` on
>> each file.
Technically doable but I'm curious, what use-case do you have in mind?
Plus I've ran into:
$ file /usr/share/doc/python-magic-5.04/example.py -b
ASCII Java program text
Seems legit, right? :)
> The `file` output would need to be store with `file` version, since its
> output is not stable in my experience.
That's not a problem, we stored the tarball name which does contain the version
I was referring to the file utility version. I know that file utility
provides different output for html file, sometimes they are clasified as
html, other time as xhtml or xml. For Ruby files, it returns something
like "ruby file" or "ruby module" but the heuristic is unreliable.
See Matt's email, who parsed my objection correctly ;)