From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Kost Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gnu: Add utfcpp. Date: Mon, 09 May 2016 11:02:32 +0300 Message-ID: <87h9e7pskn.fsf@gmail.com> References: <1462646181.1130095.601018617.5F6ADC8F@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20160507221923.GA16050@jasmine> <1462673439.1215291.601202577.5D6E31AB@webmail.messagingengine.com> <87h9e9ge6o.fsf@gmail.com> <1462718608.1361705.601472801.75471A15@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20160509033123.GA25977@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52553) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1azg9J-0003KJ-7J for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2016 04:02:42 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1azg9E-00066d-2K for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2016 04:02:40 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-x244.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::244]:34259) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1azg9D-00066Z-RK for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 May 2016 04:02:36 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-x244.google.com with SMTP id m101so20272272lfi.1 for ; Mon, 09 May 2016 01:02:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160509033123.GA25977@jasmine> (Leo Famulari's message of "Sun, 8 May 2016 23:31:23 -0400") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Leo Famulari Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Leo Famulari (2016-05-09 06:31 +0300) wrote: > On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 09:43:28AM -0500, Alex Griffin wrote: >> On Sun, May 8, 2016, at 03:13 AM, Alex Kost wrote: >> > I don't know whether we have an idiomatic way to convert "2.3.4" into >> > "2_3_4", but I would just use a tarball from github: >> >> The project was just migrated to GitHub and hasn't had a new release >> since then, so I'm using the sourceforge zip file because that's what >> other projects have downloaded and used. Also I try to avoid the >> automatically-generated GitHub archives because they're prone to change >> hashes (although I see I forgot about that in the ledger package.) > > I haven't noticed a GitHub tarball change its content unexpectedly. > > However, I have noticed that for projects who distribute tarballs from > both GitHub and another site, the tarballs are often different. The > project distributes the result of something like `make dist` on the > other site, while GitHub automatically generates a snapshot of the > tagged commit. "make dist" creates a real release and it is surely preferred over a simple repo snapshot. But this is not the case. > So, if utfcpp's GitHub and SourceForge tarballs are different, that > could be the reason, and also a reason to use the SourceForge > distribution. No it's not the reason, this utfcpp doesn't even use any build system, it consists of several files that are not built in any way. And actually tarball from github has more files (samples and tests, but it doesn't matter). -- Alex