Bryce Harrington scrisse:

...

and other files in that directory. The maximum allowed number of characters for the full path is 99.

Why 99 instead of something more expected, like 255??

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

But once again, I'd like to apply Occam's Razor logic: if the problem comes from filename too long, just try to make them shorter.

In particular, I think Clearlooks-Quicksilver-OSX can be contracted to something more compact. Jiho, can you please check if all files in your theme can stay under the 99-char limit this way?

If this isn't possible, then we could still change automake options.

Cheers, Luca

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

pax does not look familiar with me. But I have seen that the make dist-zip does not pipe through tar, so I use this to test for win32. I would also prefer to shorten the OSX package names and discuss this issue later after the release.

Adib.

On Jan 10, 2008 7:07 AM, Ted Gould <ted@...11...> wrote:

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

---

Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source.

http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel