[PATCH] Update install document to require GNU tar 1.14

[PATCH] Update install document to require GNU tar 1.14

[David Edelsohn]

	While testing GCC 4.1 RC1, I discovered that GNU tar 1.13 corrupts
some long filenames and cannot untar the distribution.  This patch updates
the documentation to require at least version 1.14 of GNU tar.  I know
that 1.15.1 works.

David

	* doc/install.texi: Require GNU tar version 1.14.

Index: install.texi
===================================================================
--- install.texi	(revision 111412)
+++ install.texi	(working copy)
@@ -284,7 +284,7 @@
 
 You must have GNU make installed to build GCC@.
 
-@item GNU tar version 1.12 (or later)
+@item GNU tar version 1.14 (or later)
 
 Necessary (only on some platforms) to untar the source code.  Many
 systems' @command{tar} programs will also work, only try GNU

Re: [PATCH] Update install document to require GNU tar 1.14

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, David Edelsohn wrote:
> 	While testing GCC 4.1 RC1, I discovered that GNU tar 1.13 corrupts
> some long filenames and cannot untar the distribution.  This patch updates
> the documentation to require at least version 1.14 of GNU tar.  I know
> that 1.15.1 works.
> 
> David
> 
> 	* doc/install.texi: Require GNU tar version 1.14.

Thanks for diagnosing that and adjusting the docs, David!

Mark, this may be something for the release announcement as well?

Gerald

Re: [PATCH] Update install document to require GNU tar 1.14

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, David Edelsohn wrote:

> 	While testing GCC 4.1 RC1, I discovered that GNU tar 1.13 corrupts
> some long filenames and cannot untar the distribution.  This patch updates
> the documentation to require at least version 1.14 of GNU tar.  I know
> that 1.15.1 works.

Given the requirement for tar 1.14, we could start generating POSIX-2001 
tar archives (tar --format=posix) and so potentially support unpacking by 
some non-GNU implementations.  (1.14 is the first GNU tar version 
supporting POSIX tar format.)  I don't think this change would be a good 
idea for 4.1.0, but we could perhaps make it for the mainline 
maintainer-scripts.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers               http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
    jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
    joseph@codesourcery.com (CodeSourcery mail)
    jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)

Re: [PATCH] Update install document to require GNU tar 1.14

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> Given the requirement for tar 1.14, we could start generating POSIX-2001 
> tar archives (tar --format=posix) and so potentially support unpacking by 
> some non-GNU implementations.  (1.14 is the first GNU tar version 
> supporting POSIX tar format.)  I don't think this change would be a good 
> idea for 4.1.0, but we could perhaps make it for the mainline 
> maintainer-scripts.

gcc.gnu.org has GNU tar 1.14, so that seems worth a try, though I do
not remember any user requests for this.

I agree that this is something for mainline only at this point (and 
perhaps in general).  Are you going to make this change?

Gerald

Re: [PATCH] Update install document to require GNU tar 1.14

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > Given the requirement for tar 1.14, we could start generating POSIX-2001 
> > tar archives (tar --format=posix) and so potentially support unpacking by 
> > some non-GNU implementations.  (1.14 is the first GNU tar version 
> > supporting POSIX tar format.)  I don't think this change would be a good 
> > idea for 4.1.0, but we could perhaps make it for the mainline 
> > maintainer-scripts.
> 
> gcc.gnu.org has GNU tar 1.14, so that seems worth a try, though I do
> not remember any user requests for this.

I've seen plenty of bug reports from users using non-GNU tar.  I'd expect 
at least some of them have tar implementations supporting POSIX-2001 
archives.

> I agree that this is something for mainline only at this point (and 
> perhaps in general).  Are you going to make this change?

I wasn't planning to, it's just an idea for discussion.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers               http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
    jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
    joseph@codesourcery.com (CodeSourcery mail)
    jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)

Re: [PATCH] Update install document to require GNU tar 1.14

[Mark Mitchell]

Gerald Pfeifer wrote:

>> 	* doc/install.texi: Require GNU tar version 1.14.
> 
> Thanks for diagnosing that and adjusting the docs, David!
> 
> Mark, this may be something for the release announcement as well?

Yes, I've got that in my notes now.

Thanks,

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713

Re: [PATCH] Update install document to require GNU tar 1.14

[Ranjit Mathew]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, David Edelsohn wrote:
> 
>> 	While testing GCC 4.1 RC1, I discovered that GNU tar 1.13 corrupts
>> some long filenames and cannot untar the distribution.  This patch updates
>> the documentation to require at least version 1.14 of GNU tar.  I know
>> that 1.15.1 works.
> 
> Given the requirement for tar 1.14, we could start generating POSIX-2001 
> tar archives (tar --format=posix) and so potentially support unpacking by 
> some non-GNU implementations.  (1.14 is the first GNU tar version 
> supporting POSIX tar format.)  I don't think this change would be a good 
> idea for 4.1.0, but we could perhaps make it for the mainline 
> maintainer-scripts.

FWIW, I was recently bitten by distributing POSIX-2001 format tar
archives created by GNU tar 1.15.1 which I had on my home PC
running Linux. The problem is that not everyone has upgraded to
GNU tar 1.14+, so they see "weird" folders like "PaxHeaders.1640"
and errors like "unknown file type `x'" and they complain to you
about distributing "corrupted" archives.

I have seen this problem on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 AS (Update
6) which uses GNU tar 1.13.25 and MinGW MSYS (Windows) which
uses tar 1.13.19.

I'm not advocating that we do not use a newer tar, but that
we document this fact "prominently enough" (in the normal
documentation as well as the release notes) and still be
prepared for problem reports from users who use older tar
programmes.

Thanks,
Ranjit.

- --
Ranjit Mathew      Email: rmathew AT gmail DOT com

Bangalore, INDIA.    Web: http://rmathew.com/


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEBUDXYb1hx2wRS48RAudcAJ4oIXeHfT+G0YAayF2wjqcKGCkN9gCcCToW
JBj6Td/FhHWk+lcfm+v4RFc=
=qdxz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----