El Jueves, 17 de Mayo de 2007 21:49, Ag. D. Hatzimanikas escribió:
>From alfs-log list.
> Sometimes packages during installation, leave in the root system files that
> are _older_ than the timestamp (mostly docs or configs), in a result
> find can not track them.
I know that that was an issue with some BLFS packages, but not sure about LFS
packages. It's a matter to test it.
> This can be avoided, if during unpacking, either the '-m' or '--touch' tar
> option is being used, so tar will not extract file's modified time,
> or else from within the sources, execute the following
> find . -exec touch {} \;
>
> But *this* is overkill, since tar can do the same thing with no cost.
The tar option looks more obvious, but I think that to be useful the package's
sources files touch need be done after creating the timestamp-marker file.
And we must be sure that that will not mess some package build. For example,
what could happen if some foo.{in,am} file ends having a newer timestamp than
foo?
--
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info
TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discuss
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
