Re: [libvirt] Bump tar format?
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 10:14:11AM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
This issue appeared again:
On 07/22/2015 11:57 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 07/22/2015 08:44 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
>> 1. rename the test case, making it shorter;
>
> Works if we can do it, but I agree we should add a syntax check to
> enforce it.
>
>>
>> 2. bump tar format from ustar, which has limitations on the length
>> of file names, to posix/pax, which has no such limitations.
>
> Might be doable, if RHEL 5 autoconf/automake/tar supports it. Here's
> where we switched to ustar:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2012-April/msg01435.html
> commit 75ad8b67
>
> and even then, we ran into problems with too-long symlinks (which are
> processed differently than regular files).
Since RHEL5 support has been dropped for a while now, maybe it's time to
revisit changing the tar format
Yep, IIUC we should be fine for require pax support for the vintage of
Linux we required. *BSD should be fine too, so IIUC, their tar version
uses libarchive which supports pax. Windows has 7-zip which can do pax
and of course cygwin. Finally OS-X has the pax command and support in
the apple archive utility.
So I think we're be fine to require it.
While, we're changing this, I think we should probably take the opportunity
to also switch over to using 'xz' as our compression format, instead of gz.
Consider the 1.3.5 release compressed with different formats:
35109092 libvirt-1.3.5.tar.gz
25573966 libvirt-1.3.5.tar.bz2
12112612 libvirt-1.3.5.tar.xz
Those results seem pretty compelling to me :-)
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|