Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 19:40:32 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG> To: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.ORG>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, Martin Blapp <mb@imp.ch>, Martin Blapp <mbr@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/editors/openoffice-devel Makefile distinfo pkg-message pkg-plist ports/editors/openoffice-devel/files debugpatch-setup2::mow::source::loader::loader.c debugpatch-solenv::inc::unx Message-ID: <20021019164032.GA99082@vega.vega.com> In-Reply-To: <200210191602.g9JG2xpg092605@intruder.bmah.org> References: <20021018233203.GA85166@xor.obsecurity.org> <20021019013520.E90671-100000@levais.imp.ch> <20021019021321.GA87745@xor.obsecurity.org> <20021018194359.A46176@FreeBSD.org> <200210190415.g9J4FAH0083715@intruder.bmah.org> <20021019050045.GA14922@vega.vega.com> <200210191602.g9JG2xpg092605@intruder.bmah.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 09:02:59AM -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote: > If memory serves me right, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > [patch pathnames are too long] > > > Isn't this solved with introduction of modern tar(1), which can handle > > paths up to 250 characters long? Or we aren't switched to the creation > > of ustar format archives for the release yet? > > Whatever format archive is used for the ports distribution, it needs to > be extracted by both tar *and* cpio. sysinstall calls cpio to extract > the ports tree distribution. cpio shouldn't have any problems with it, because it supports ustar archives without any problems (unlike old tar). > > Looks like a inexcusable > > omission to me if so, because patches for this were submitted by me > > to the re@ team before 4.6-RELEASE, but back then were voted down, because > > it was noticed that old tar(1) shipped with 4.6 was unable to properly > > extract archives in the ustar format. > > At the time, I thought it was was unreasonable to ship a tar archive > that our system tar couldn't read. Is it worser than knowingly shipping ports collection, which contains some patches missed due to the LongLink problem? > > I've supposed that those patches > > were included into 4.7, but actually never bothered to check for sure. > > Please at least include them into 5.0, so that the problem is closed > > once for all. > > Assuming that the patch now works with our system tar: You said in your > original posting to re@ that this patch was "not well-tested but seems > to work". I personally would like a greater degree of confidence than > that, but it's not high enough on my priority list to put any cycles > into it. (Note: comments such as "inexcusable omission" are not likely > to increase my motivation.) > > If it's that important to you, why don't you make the patch > "well-tested"? Ok, I'll test it. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021019164032.GA99082>