[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness
From: |
Alexandre Duret-Lutz |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness |
Date: |
Fri, 16 Apr 2004 09:36:56 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:
Paul> Alexandre Duret-Lutz <address@hidden> writes:
>> 1. The --format=posix options is a GNU Tar option, which means `make dist'
>> can no longer be run with other make implementations.
Paul> Presumably you meant "tar implementations" and not "make
Paul> implementations"?
Yep.
Paul> But this is already the case, as the existing code uses
Paul> the -o option, which is specific to GNU tar (the -o
Paul> option has a different meaning with traditional tar, and
Paul> traditional tar rejects -o when creating archives).
Thanks, I didn't know that. My comment was only based on the
fact that the automake test suite uses it and nobody ever
complained about it. But of course the test suite doesn't
verify the output format.
Looking into why I never noticed myself, I can see that
Solaris 8's tar ignores `o' when creating archives (I guess it
create a ustar file, though I do not know how to verify this).
FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD/Darwin's tar understand `o' as a V7 request
like GNU Tar.
OSF1's tar understand's `o' as GNU tar does when creating archives,
and as Solaris does when extracting archives.
I cannot check more platform. But at least it's interesting
that it works on more that just GNU tar.
>> Forcing the ustar format might be a possibility (is it?), if
>> that can be done portably (that probably involves a configure
>> check).
Paul> Yes, I think this is the best approach: that is, use --format=ustar if
Paul> available, then -o if that works, otherwise don't use anything.
>> Another idea is to arrange the dist rules so users have
>> a way to override the tar options.
Paul> That also might be helpful, though I think not as useful; most users
Paul> won't want to futz with this.
Ok. I'll try to do both of these this week-end and Cc the patch
to bug-tar for comments.
--
Alexandre Duret-Lutz
- [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/15
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness,
Alexandre Duret-Lutz <=
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/17
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/17
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Roger Leigh, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/18