Isn't this what is already common in the Python community?

> I don't want to unpack an archive and have to scrutinize it for files with o+rxst permissions, or have their creation date be anything other than when I unpacked them.

I'm the opposite, when I pack and unpack something, I want the files to be identical including attributes. Why should I throw away all the timestamps, just because the file were temporarily in an archive?

▲

password4321 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Why should I throw away all the timestamps, just because the file were temporarily in an archive?

In case anyone is unaware, you don't have to throw away all the timestamps when using "zip with no compression". The metadata for each zipped file includes one timestamp (originally rounded to even number of seconds in local time).

I am a big last modified timestamp fan and am often discouraged that scp, git, and even many zip utilities are not (at least by default).

	▲	rcxdude an hour ago \| parent [-]
		git updates timestamps in part by necessity of compatibility with build systems. If it applied the timestamp of when the file was last modified on checkout then most build systems would break if you checked out an older commit.

▲

rustyhancock 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, it's a lossy process.

If your archive drops it you can't get it back.

If you don't want it you can just chmod -R u=rw,go=r,a-x

	▲	1718627440 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> If your archive drops it you can't get it back. Hence, the common archive format is tar not zip.