Thread: Broken 1.8.2 source tar ball?
Hi all,
I'm solving problem with pgadmin tarball it contains ??_?? in i18n directory.
This directory is empty, but it generates problem with ksh93.
Is it possible to rewrap it or release 1.8.3?
thanks Zdenek
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@sun.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm solving problem with pgadmin tarball it contains ??_?? in i18n > directory. This directory is empty, but it generates problem with ksh93. > > Is it possible to rewrap it or release 1.8.3? 1.8.3 should probably be released soon, but I'm not going to rewrap 1.8.2. Can you see what caused the problem? -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Dave Page wrote: > On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Zdenek Kotala > <Zdenek.Kotala@sun.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm solving problem with pgadmin tarball it contains ??_?? in i18n > > directory. This directory is empty, but it generates problem with > > ksh93. > > > > Is it possible to rewrap it or release 1.8.3? > > 1.8.3 should probably be released soon, but I'm not going to rewrap > 1.8.2. Can you see what caused the problem? Didn't we have a similar issue in the main backend, that was due to a broken version of "tar"? Any chance you are using a broken version of tar to unpack it, or if a broken version of tar was used to pack it? //Magnus
Dave Page napsal(a):
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@sun.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm solving problem with pgadmin tarball it contains ??_?? in i18n
>> directory. This directory is empty, but it generates problem with ksh93.
>>
>> Is it possible to rewrap it or release 1.8.3?
>
> 1.8.3 should probably be released soon, but I'm not going to rewrap
> 1.8.2.
>Can you see what caused the problem?
pga 1.8.2 is integrated into OpenSolaris SFW repository and some command/script
has problem when works with this repository (in ksh93). Probably some extra
quoting is necessary. I don't have details yet, I contacted submitter, but he is
in different TZ. I can fix it with rm after unpacking, but better solution is
put new tarbal into repository.
What soon exactly mean? I think I can wait one or two weeks.
Zdenek
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@sun.com> wrote: > Dave Page napsal(a): > > > Can you see what caused the problem? > > > > pga 1.8.2 is integrated into OpenSolaris SFW repository and some > command/script has problem when works with this repository (in ksh93). > Probably some extra quoting is necessary. I don't have details yet, I > contacted submitter, but he is in different TZ. I can fix it with rm after > unpacking, but better solution is put new tarbal into repository. No, I mean what caused the problem when the tarball was generated? The file is in there: drwxrwxrwx dpage/dpage 0 2008-02-01 09:26 pgadmin3-1.8.2/i18n/ drwxrwxrwx dpage/dpage 0 2008-02-01 09:26 pgadmin3-1.8.2/i18n/??_??/ drwxrwxrwx dpage/dpage 0 2008-02-01 09:27 pgadmin3-1.8.2/i18n/af_ZA/ I just don't have time to investigate right now. From memory, ??_?? is the wildcard used to package up the i18n directories, but I don't see offhand why tar would include it as a directory itself. > What soon exactly mean? I think I can wait one or two weeks. Unknown at the moment. I'm pretty busy right now. Possibly next week. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Magnus Hagander napsal(a):
> Dave Page wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 9:16 AM, Zdenek Kotala
>> <Zdenek.Kotala@sun.com> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I'm solving problem with pgadmin tarball it contains ??_?? in i18n
>>> directory. This directory is empty, but it generates problem with
>>> ksh93.
>>>
>>> Is it possible to rewrap it or release 1.8.3?
>> 1.8.3 should probably be released soon, but I'm not going to rewrap
>> 1.8.2. Can you see what caused the problem?
>
> Didn't we have a similar issue in the main backend, that was due to a
> broken version of "tar"? Any chance you are using a broken version of
> tar to unpack it, or if a broken version of tar was used to pack it?
The problem with backend was a length of PATH. This is real content. I try two
version of tar (solaris and gnu) and both generate same result.
Zdenek
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@sun.com> wrote: > The problem with backend was a length of PATH. This is real content. I try > two version of tar (solaris and gnu) and both generate same result. I think we're misunderstanding each other here. The ??_?? directory *is* in the tarball. I see it on the build machine. The question is, why is it there - is there something wrong with the makefile? If I simply re-roll (or release 1.8.3) I see no reason to think that the same problem won't exist in that too. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com