Well, it's been a total failure

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Tuesday, September 14, 2010 15:50:22 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 9/14/10 17:05 CDT, Walter Bright wrote:
> > retard wrote:
> >> Tue, 14 Sep 2010 14:14:42 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
> >>> retard wrote:
> >>>> The difference is, on *nix the disabled executable flag prevents *all
> >>>> users* from launching the application. The attributes have a standard
> >>>> meaning.
> >>> 
> >>> No, the meanings are not standard between Windows and Linux. There's no
> >>> way to make them standard, either. The file systems are *different*.
> >> 
> >> Across *nixen. I couldn't care less about Windows.
> > 
> > Dmd supports Windows, therefore it must care about it.
> > 
> >> A power user version of the zipper would support both sets of
> >> attributes and would also provide an interface for modifyin them.
> > 
> > Except that I could not find such a utility - for Windows or Unix.
> 
> So please let's restart - what _exactly_ is the utility we need? Far as
> I can tell what we're looking for looking for a zip utility that knows
> how to preserve the executable bit on Unix, and produce otherwise
> readable archives for Windows. That's it. From what I can tell, the zip
> already available on Linux does all that.
> 
> Andrei

I understood that the files in question are being zipped on a windows box, and 
since the windows file system is not going to retain any of the unix permissions, 
the zipped files won't either. I take it that Walter's utility is meant to 
appropriately set the unix permissions when it zips the files.

Of course, I could have completely misunderstood, but that's what it seemed to 
me was going on.

Personally, I would think that it would make more sense to do the linux build on 
a linux machine and package it with tar and bzip2 (or gzip if you're old school 
and want a larger download), while the windows build is done a windows machine 
and zipped there, creating two separate downloads - one for linux and one for 
windows (and presumably, you'd do the same for the other architectures). All file 
permissions are thus properly maintained. Since I assume that you have to do the 
build on the appropriate machine _anyway_, I don't see why we should be going to 
the trouble of creating a single zip file with both. Normally, people only want 
one of the two anyway.

- Jonathan M Davis