Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 19:56:23 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: /setup.html please read
Message-ID: <20011102195623.B31781@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <6EB31774D39507408D04392F40A10B2BC1FDBD AT FDYEXC202 DOT mgroupnet DOT com> <20011102134725 DOT G26975 AT redhat DOT com> <1004745291 DOT 9086 DOT 74 DOT camel AT lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1004745291.9086.74.camel@lifelesswks>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.21i

On Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 10:58:56AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>On Sat, 2001-11-03 at 05:47, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 12:23:12PM -0500, Roth, Kevin P. wrote:
>
>> >2) Under "Making Packages", I think the "standard" for binary packages
>> >is to leave off the initial "/" on filenames inside the tarball.  E.g.:
>> >    usr/doc/cURL-7.9/README
>> >instead of
>> >    /usr/doc/cURL-7.9/README
>> >I think the point is to allow someone to expand the binary package into
>> >some other location (besides "/") if desired for whatever reason.
>> 
>> I think this is implied by:
>> 
>> 	* Binary packages are extracted in /, include all file paths from the
>> 	root in your archive.
>> 
>> Actually, this should be:
>> 
>> /usr/doc/cygwin/cURL-7.9-1.README
>> or
>> /usr/doc/cygwin/cURL-7.9.README
>
>In the tarball it needs to be usr/doc/cygwin/cURL-7.9-1.README doesn't
>it? (for correct manual extraction).
>
>Hmm, I'll have to dig beep into tar.cc to answer this - Chris what is
>the impact of skipping a leading / ?

Isn't everyone already building packages without the leading '/'?  GNU
tar complains about absolute filenames otherwise.  I guess I'm now scared
to check.  I missed the fact that everyone was producing packages without
the -n part.  Maybe everyone is also producing packages with leading '/'
too.

However, relative paths are correct.  I guess it makes sense to be
specific and refer to this as usr/doc/cURL-7.9-1/README but, as I said,
I thought this was implied.

>> >3) I realize this one is kind of nit-picky, but the 4th bullet under
>> >"Making Packages" mentions a "file" named /usr/doc/foo-vendor, when in
>> >fact this should call it a "directory".
>> 
>> Actually, this is correct.   This should be a file.
>
>Nope, directory. Sorry Chris :}. 

Yes, I've already noted this.  I must have missed a memo.  I guess this
is a testimony to the fact that I never have to read the documentation.

cgf