On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 08:36:49AM +0100, Matt Burgess wrote: > > I must admit, I really don't like putting 'lfs' in the tarball name. > Can't we still use the same 'unpack; cd; build' process, if we add a > note that one needs to use tar's --transform option? The following > works for me: > > tar xf ../tzdata2012c.tar.gz --transform 's|^|tzdata-2012c/|' > Sounds interesting.
> That would still need an 'adjustment' :-) to jhalfs but shouldn't be too > ugly and/or onerous. > > Additionally, this packaging issue should be reported upstream. I don't > mind doing that, if no one's got around to it yet? > > Thanks, > > Matt. > When I was looking at their lists after I discovered 2012e had been released, I had the impression that people were already used to their current format, i.e. glibc wasn't the only user, and had infrastructure to handle upgrades. So, that might not be popular. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
