[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] more portable bootstrap procedure
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] more portable bootstrap procedure |
Date: |
Sat, 13 Dec 2008 13:52:46 +0100 |
Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> wrote:
> * Jim Meyering wrote on Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 01:09:10PM CET:
>> Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> wrote:
>> >
>> > There is one question I have on this: coreutils requires 'tar', my patch
>> > will allow $TAR as GNU tar. However, Automake's macros will honor
>> > $AMTAR only, not $TAR. Is this where tar is used, or are there other
>> > instances I am not aware of? If yes, should I fix check_versions to
>> > check $AMTAR instead of $TAR?
>
>> Whichever you prefer is fine with me. I use neither.
>
> Well, why is tar then listed as a build prerequisite in bootstrap.conf?
> Have you had a bad experience with non-GNU tar in 'make dist'?
Personally, I'd like tar to honor the TAR_OPTIONS envvar,
as set in GNUmakefile. But that's useful only when creating
a distribution tarball, and even then, it's not critical.
>> The rest of those changes look fine and passed a smoke test,
>> so I'll push it (but without the Signed-off-by line) unless
>
> You don't use Signed-off-by for coreutils? Why not?
Adding a "Signed-off-by: NAME" line is redundant when
Author: already lists that same NAME.
>> you want to make further changes.
>
> Well, yes, depending on your answers to above, either remove the 'tar'
> line from bootstrap.conf, or add a line like
> test "$appvar" = TAR && appvar=AMTAR
>
> to check_versions and s/TAR/AMTAR/ in usage.
>
> Cheers, and thanks for the quick review,
> Ralf
Re: [PATCH] more portable bootstrap procedure, Pádraig Brady, 2008/12/13