Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm going through Coreutils GNUmakefile and Makefile.maint to identify > useful rules. Some question pop up: > > 1) > > Is this rule generally safe? Does it assume GNU tar? Is there a real > problem solved by this, or is it just "nice"? > > # Make tar archive easier to reproduce. > export TAR_OPTIONS = --owner=0 --group=0 --numeric-owner
Those options help minimize unnecessary differences between tar archives. > Further, shouldn't automake set this, if it is safe? They're all gnu-tar-specific. In Makefile.maint, I've tried to keep things simple, and independent of automake/autoconf/etc. However, I do assume that you (the developer) have GNU tools like tar, grep, and make. > 2) > > The following is not safe, --rsyncable is a new feature. > > # Do not save the original name or timestamp in the .tar.gz file. > GZIP_ENV = '--no-name --best --rsyncable' > > Perhaps this, and the previous case, should be moved to a m4 macro, to > find out whether the parameters are supported or not. Thoughts? Rather, how about keeping the tests stand-alone? For example, here's the change I've just made so that the rule works even when gzip doesn't support the --rsyncable option: Index: Makefile.maint =================================================================== RCS file: /fetish/cu/Makefile.maint,v retrieving revision 1.226 diff -u -p -r1.226 Makefile.maint --- Makefile.maint 8 Feb 2006 12:44:36 -0000 1.226 +++ Makefile.maint 10 Feb 2006 17:43:20 -0000 @@ -24,7 +24,9 @@ ME := Makefile.maint # Do not save the original name or timestamp in the .tar.gz file. -GZIP_ENV = '--no-name --best --rsyncable' +gzip_rsyncable := \ + $(shell gzip --help|grep rsyncable >/dev/null && echo --rsyncable) +GZIP_ENV = '--no-name --best $(gzip_rsyncable)' CVS = cvs _______________________________________________ bug-gnulib mailing list bug-gnulib@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib