I don't see a problem with it, and if you took the time to code it
there is obviously at least one user (I have no idea how common patch
series tarballs are). I do have some comments below, but nothing that
As I hint below, you might want to autodetect tarballs with --series
I guess any occurrence of /../ in the middle of n should be caught as
well? Or can't that happen?
By the way, is the separator always '/' in tarfile? Or should you use
os.sep? (There is also os.pardir which you could use instead of '..',
Perhaps "no 'series' file ...", to make it clear what the name should
Hmm. It seems like such a waste to go via the file system here, when
tarfile has such nice file extraction methods.
What you could do is something like this:
1. Make two small classes with the same interface, one backed by a
tarfile and one backed by a directory, that have two methods:
get_series() and get_file(filename). Both methods return
file-like objects (created by either open() or
tarfile.extractfile()).
2. Change __import_series() to use objects of this class rather than
a directory directly -- starting with creating an instance of one
or the other depending on tarfile.is_tarfile(). This will involve
teaching __import_file to accept a file-like object instead of
just a file name, but that's a one-liner.
3. Drop the --tarfile flag, since you've just taught the --series
flag to handle tarballs!
That said, if you don't feel like doing it the hard way, I won't
insist. The way you coded it is in no way bad (in particular, you
Aaah! My eyes! My _eyes_!!!!!
Seriously, though, you'd want to use something like shutil.rmtree
here.
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
www.treskal.com/kalle
--
