Depreciating <reference>

Jamie Bennett jamie_bennett at
Tue Feb 3 05:24:19 PST 2004

Kevin P. Fleming wrote on 03 February 2004 13:48
>Jamie Bennett wrote:
>> IIRC <reference> in <unpack> was the original implementation but
>> was found lacking when it came to uncompressed files thus <download>

>> was implemented. Now we are making wholesale changes to the DTD it
>> may be an idea to only include one standard way of retrieving files
>> and that way should be <download>. 
>That would be my biggest concern, that <unpack> does not know how to 
>handle non-archive non-compressed files. I don't know how we would 
>document that it did (if we extended it to do so), since "unpack" 
>implies the program is going to take some action on the file after 
>downloading it.

I don't quite get what you mean. 

I was simply taking about removing <reference> from version 3.2 of the 
DTD and instead make the user explicitly use <download> if they are 
retrieving remote files. (makes sense to me and should to a new user).

I'm just working on adding <base> to <unpack> and <download> and seeing
the two very similar blocks of code in <unpack> and <download> made me
wonder if they were both needed. At the very least we could factor them
out into a lib but I don't think we should support <reference> anymore.

Jamie Bennett	-	jamie at linuxfromscratch dot org

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list