So, is there any objection to changing the tar compatibility in release tarballs?
--Ted
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 14:11 -0800, Ted Gould wrote:
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 20:48 +0100, Luca Bruno wrote:
This is to ensure portability even to old format of tar, in particular tar V7, please see: http://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_chapter/tar_8.html
This behaviour can be changed for automake, see: http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Options.html
To quote the page:
tar-pax selects the new pax interchange format defined by POSIX 1003.1-2001. It does not limit the length of file names. However, this format is very young and should probably be restricted to packages that target only very modern platforms. There are moves to change the pax format in an upward-compatible way, so this option may refer to a more recent version in the future.
So are we really concerned about people who have GTK+ 2.10 but not a tar implementation that is less than 7 years old?
--Ted
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel