| Summary: | Ark does not support using the 7zz binary for 7z archives | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Applications] ark | Reporter: | nl6720 |
| Component: | plugins | Assignee: | Elvis Angelaccio <elvis.angelaccio> |
| Status: | REPORTED --- | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | aacid, gbcox, nl6720, rthomsen6 |
| Priority: | NOR | ||
| Version: | 22.08.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Platform: | Arch Linux | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| See Also: | https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=440135 | ||
| Latest Commit: | Version Fixed In: | ||
| Sentry Crash Report: | |||
|
Description
nl6720
2022-08-26 09:28:36 UTC
Currently, FreeBSD and openSUSE's 7-Zip packages have `7z` which links to `7zz`, but ALT Linux and Ubuntu's 7-Zip packages have no `7z`. While it would be possible to adapt Ark to support the 7zz binary, it wouldn't be the right thing to do. Distributions that ship the new 7zz binary should also provide a legacy 7z symlink for compatibility, like e.g. openSUSE does. The fact that Ark needed to specifically add support for the 7z binary being the official 7-zip, shows that thoughtlessly symlinking 7z to 7zz is not wise. (In reply to nl6720 from comment #3) > The fact that Ark needed to specifically add support for the 7z binary being > the official 7-zip, shows that thoughtlessly symlinking 7z to 7zz is not > wise. I disagree. Ark is the exception here, because it uses 7z in advanced way, so we had no choice. Think about the common case. The 7z binary has been around for years and software in the wild assumed they could extract a random 7zip archive with a simple call to "7z x foo.7z". (In reply to Elvis Angelaccio from comment #4) > (In reply to nl6720 from comment #3) > > The fact that Ark needed to specifically add support for the 7z binary being > > the official 7-zip, shows that thoughtlessly symlinking 7z to 7zz is not > > wise. > > I disagree. Ark is the exception here, because it uses 7z in advanced way, > so we had no choice. > > Think about the common case. The 7z binary has been around for years and > software in the wild assumed they could extract a random 7zip archive with a > simple call to "7z x foo.7z". I understand that some people and distributions may use 7z for compatibility purposes and I have no issues with that, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't support the actual binary from 7zip which is 7zz. My understanding is that the one 7zz binary can be used to replace the unmaintained p7zip ('7zr', '7za', '7z'). 7zz will always exist on a system that has 7zip installed, 7z as a symlink may or may not. (In reply to Gerald Cox from comment #5) > (In reply to Elvis Angelaccio from comment #4) > > (In reply to nl6720 from comment #3) > > > The fact that Ark needed to specifically add support for the 7z binary being > > > the official 7-zip, shows that thoughtlessly symlinking 7z to 7zz is not > > > wise. > > > > I disagree. Ark is the exception here, because it uses 7z in advanced way, > > so we had no choice. > > > > Think about the common case. The 7z binary has been around for years and > > software in the wild assumed they could extract a random 7zip archive with a > > simple call to "7z x foo.7z". > > I understand that some people and distributions may use 7z for compatibility > purposes and I have no issues with that, but that doesn't mean that you > shouldn't support the actual binary from 7zip which is 7zz. My > understanding is that the one 7zz binary can be used to replace the > unmaintained p7zip ('7zr', '7za', '7z'). 7zz will always exist on a system > that has 7zip installed, 7z as a symlink may or may not. This won't be necessary. Ark 24.05 ships with basic 7z support through libarchive, which means it no longer requires any binary at all. However, I'll leave this report open until we don't officially drop the legacy p7zip plugin. |