[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: rules, rules, and more (code policy) rules

From: Simon Josefsson
Subject: Re: rules, rules, and more (code policy) rules
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:03:33 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:

> Simon Josefsson <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> # Make tar archive easier to reproduce.
>>>> export TAR_OPTIONS = --owner=0 --group=0 --numeric-owner
>>> Those options help minimize unnecessary differences between tar archives.
> ...
>> Still, I think the TAR stuff is different.  You can't set TAR_OPTIONS
>> in gnulib.mk, because it is not portable.  I see a couple of options:
>> 1) Move the tar options stuff to automake proper.
>> 2) Make automake adhere to a TAR_OPTIONS make variable.
>> 3) Write a wrapper-script for 'tar' that is included, which
>>    will set those variables if possible.
> What are you trying to accomplish?
> Making this minor optimization work also for developers who don't
> have GNU tar does not justify splitting things into separate files.
> Why do you want a TAR_OPTIONS variable?
> Can't you just define AMTAR to include whatever
> options you want?  If portability is an issue, then
> do the same thing here that I did with gzip's --rsyncable option.

I didn't want to go through the GNUmakefile approach above, but rather
have things portable.  However, I changed my mind, the GNUmakefile
approach seems more flexible, and it is reasonable to assume that
developers are using GNU tools.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]