This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: naim review (was Re: Pending package status (14 Jul 2003))

Daniel Reed wrote:
> On 2003-07-15T23:40+0100, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
> ) On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
> ) > On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, Max Bowsher wrote:
> ) > > It's not the names. That didn't seem right, and testing confirmed -
> ) > > failure mode when the version number is changed to 0.11.5-1 in file
> names ) > > and setup.ini.
> ) > >
> ) > > Nothing else looks odd with the package files, either.
> ) > >
> ) > > I'll see if I can add some extra logging to the relevant place in
> ) If you wouldn't mind Max, thet'd be great.
> Any headway on this? I see naim's version listed as now,
> still get the same behaviour. Off the top of my head, I'm wondering if the
> symlinks in the tarball could be confusing something.

OK, I've found the problem. Setup's integrated tar code is rather
oversensitive to magic numbers. Specifically, your naim tarball does not
contain "ustar\040\040\0" at offset 257. Repacking with GNU tar is the short
term fix. Long term, maybe setup could become more tolerant in its tar
code - PTC. What kind of tar did you pack these packages with?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]