Re: source tarballs

* Peter da Silva [2006-05-26 23:40]: > Annoyingly hard to do portably from a Makefile. Easier to port a shell than a shell script... before you even to mention the variety make flavours... Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis //

Re: source tarballs

> How hard is it to tar up a source tree in its own sub-directory? Annoyingly hard to do portably from a Makefile. Which is hateful.

Re: source tarballs

On 5/26/06, Jeremy Stephens wrote: How hard is it to tar up a source tree in its own sub-directory? Obviously for some it must be really difficult. When I 'tar -xvzf your-cool-program-1.0.tar.gz', it damn well better extract itself into the 'your-cool-program-1.0' directory instead of crapping

Re: source tarballs

On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 11:13 -0500, Jeremy Stephens wrote: > How hard is it to tar up a source tree in its own sub-directory? > Obviously for some it must be really difficult. When I 'tar -xvzf > your-cool-program-1.0.tar.gz', it damn well better extract itself into > the 'your-cool-program-1.0

source tarballs

How hard is it to tar up a source tree in its own sub-directory? Obviously for some it must be really difficult. When I 'tar -xvzf your-cool-program-1.0.tar.gz', it damn well better extract itself into the 'your-cool-program-1.0' directory instead of crapping all over my current directory.