From: Aaron W. L. <aar...@aa...> - 2008-03-27 21:13:46
|
I'm about to upload some GCC 'tech previews' within the next few days so this discussion is timely. See below. Keith Marshall wrote: > In my sample build procedure, I suggested using: Where is this 'sample build procedure'? > To ensure integrity > of our release tarballs, I would suggest that this `h' flag should be > mandatory, when creating the archives. I agree. I think it is premature to use links in MinGW packages, as as the benefit is minimal, archiver support is poor, hard links are surprising to many Windows uses (and many Windows programs), and most installations still do not support file soft links. > The above sample command also raises two other potential discussion > points: first note that I've used `z' --> `.tar.gz' as the compression > standard I agree. .tar.gz is a file format that has substantial support and all of the capabilities that MinGW needs. Chasing the latest compression fad, whether its bzip2, lzma, rzip, or 7zip is probably not productive when the marginal gains do not offset the increased difficulty of decompression. Universality is the primary goal; compression ratio is secondary. > and second that I've included a `-bin' qualifier for the > archive name. So source releases will still have -src? If so, -bin may not add anything. I don't care either way, but the more qualifiers that are added, the more difficult it may be for users to figure out which packages they need. |