Maneage - Tasks: task #15699, Unified format for software...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
task #15699: Unified format for software tarballs
Submitter: | Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi> | ||
Submitted: | Fri 19 Jun 2020 01:14:33 AM UTC | ||
Should Start On: | Thu 18 Jun 2020 11:00:00 PM UTC | Should be Finished on: | Thu 18 Jun 2020 11:00:00 PM UTC |
Category: | Software | Priority: | 5 - Normal |
Status: | Postponed | Privacy: | Public |
Percent Complete: | 80% | Assigned to: | makhlaghi |
Open/Closed: | Open | Effort: | 0.00 |
( Jump to the original submission )
Tue 18 Jan 2022 03:40:50 PM UTC, comment #17: |
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
Mon 03 Jan 2022 06:49:36 PM UTC, comment #16:
FWIW, Paul Eggert is proposing to add an option to GNU tar to make it produce about the same format now produced by tarlz except for the CRC that tarlz adds to the extended records.
|
Antonio Diaz Diaz <antonio> |
Sun 02 Jan 2022 03:56:40 AM UTC, comment #15: Here is a more generalized script that will look into all the files in an 'odir' origin-directory (assuming it only contains tarballs) and converts them to the proper format, while also printing the checksum that is also necessary in Maneage.
|
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
Sat 01 Jan 2022 03:57:42 PM UTC, comment #14: For now, I am packaging the source codes with the code box in Comment #9 (without using 'tarlz').
|
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
Sat 01 Jan 2022 12:04:37 PM UTC, comment #13: So what script is currently recommended for https://gitlab.com/maneage/tarballs-software contributions ? The script from Mon 01 Nov 2021 12:09:58 AM UTC, comment #9 here at https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/index.php?15699? Or an updated script using 'tarlz'?
|
Boud Roukema <boud>![]() |
Wed 03 Nov 2021 05:33:33 PM UTC, comment #12:
|
Antonio Diaz Diaz <antonio> |
Wed 03 Nov 2021 03:38:47 PM UTC, comment #11: Thanks a lot for the great clarification! It was so puzzling for me how the Boost tarball become so large!
|
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
Tue 02 Nov 2021 04:21:03 PM UTC, comment #10:
|
Antonio Diaz Diaz <antonio> |
Mon 01 Nov 2021 12:09:58 AM UTC, comment #9: In the (long!) process of updating the Maneage software and unifying the tarball format, I have found one package so far that has long file names (and fails with the ustar method): Boost.
|
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
Wed 06 Oct 2021 07:54:35 AM UTC, comment #8: That is a good point, thanks Antonio. So far, this tiny script is just here and not yet in Maneage, but to avoid forgetting, here is the current version:
|
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
Tue 05 Oct 2021 03:12:18 PM UTC, comment #7: One more thing.
|
Antonio Diaz Diaz <antonio> |
Tue 05 Oct 2021 09:44:13 AM UTC, comment #6: Thanks again Antonio, I just edited those tarballs with the '-9' option to Lzip in Commit da4d019c9 (of the software tarball project). As we see there, the sizes did in fact shrink :-).
|
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
Mon 04 Oct 2021 06:16:24 PM UTC, comment #5:
|
Antonio Diaz Diaz <antonio> |
Mon 04 Oct 2021 05:57:36 PM UTC, comment #4: Good point! You mean to use the '--best' (or '-9') option when calling lzip, right?
|
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
Mon 04 Oct 2021 05:41:42 PM UTC, comment #3:
|
Antonio Diaz Diaz <antonio> |
Mon 04 Oct 2021 01:04:39 AM UTC, comment #2: Thanks a lot Antonio for the very good analysis, and guidance on the proper GNU Tar command to use.
|
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
Sat 27 Jun 2020 06:19:14 PM UTC, comment #1: It is unfortunate that GNU tar still defaults to "gnu" format[1] because the features provided by the "gnu" format were implemented in a way incompatible with other archive formats. In particular the "gnu" format is incompatible with the two POSIX formats (ustar and pax(posix)).
|
Antonio Diaz Diaz <antonio> |
Fri 19 Jun 2020 01:14:33 AM UTC, original submission:
Currently the software source codes are mostly stored in the same tarball that they were originally distributed: most are '.tar.gz', some are '.tar.xz', and some '.tar.lz' (mostly those I have had to re-package for special reasons), and some even in '.zip'!
|
Mohammad Akhlaghi <makhlaghi>![]() ![]() |
No files currently attached
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follow 5 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2022-01-18 | makhlaghi | Percent Complete | 50% | ![]() |
80% |
2021-10-05 | makhlaghi | Percent Complete | 0% | ![]() |
50% |
Assigned to | None | ![]() |
makhlaghi | ||
2021-10-04 | makhlaghi | Summary | Unified format for software source code archival | ![]() |
Unified format for software tarballs |
2020-06-19 | makhlaghi | Carbon-Copy | - | ![]() |
Added -email is unavailable- |
The standardized tarballs (as part of the software update of task #16103) have now been uploaded to our software repository in Zenodo: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5873409 (version cf00eda; this is the first seven characters of the hash of the commit in https://git.maneage.org/tarballs-software.git ).
I have updated the "percent complete" to 80% since we still haven't added this to the documentation! But generally, all new software that are merged into the 'maneage' branch should follow this format (and that is easy with the script we have developed below in comment #15; just after some additional automation as described there)