[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness
From: |
Roger Leigh |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness |
Date: |
Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:17:30 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Bob Friesenhahn <address@hidden> writes:
> Is there a reason to allow file names longer than 99 characters in a
> package? Clearly this is non-portable. Why not enforce a maximum
> file name length of 99 characters in Automake?
I experience the breakage when using Doxygen to generate a reference
manual from C++ code. Some of the filenames it generates are over 80
chars, due to using namespaces, and long classnames etc. If the path
is called libfoobar-baz-12.32.44/doc/libfoobar-baz/html/., that's an
extra 46 chars in the path. The 99 char limit has been comfortably
exceeded, and I had no control over this!
[There are options to produce mangled 8.3 names, but I want them to be
human readable.]
> One way to enforce this is to use sed to truncate file names longer
> than 99 characters before passing them to tar so that tar
> complains/fails during 'make dist'.
What if the truncated names already exist? You will then silently
produce a broken archive. Better to do
find . | wc -L
to get an accurate figure, and then bail out.
I'm using the patch I posted. If and when anyone complains, I'll
instruct them to build and install the latest GNU tar (or build it for
them). I require the functionality for long pathnames, and I don't
want to have to support broken tools. For my needs, 99 chars is not
at all sufficient.
Regards,
Roger
--
Roger Leigh
Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848. Please sign and encrypt your mail.
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, (continued)
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/19
- Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/20
- Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/20
- Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/23
- Message not available
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/19
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Bob Friesenhahn, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness,
Roger Leigh <=
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Ralph Schleicher, 2004/04/17
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Roger Leigh, 2004/04/17
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/18