Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/1998/06/23/05:02:56
Frank Donahoe wrote:
> I do not think the date on the archive is a convenient way to distinguish
> one patch level from another. Ordinary "ftp" resets the time stamp to
> the date of retrieval and in any event the date on the archive is not
> the same as the date of the latest file in the archive. Routinely I
> reset the time stamp of the archives to this "latest date" by using the
> "-o" option to "zip" or the "-T" option to "unzip". In the example
> cited above, "lgp2811s.zip" bore the date May 6, 22:33 while the internal
> date is April 29, 20:37:16. (My local time, EST, if everything is
> working.)
Yet another problem is that some mirror sites do not preserve the date
and time, but set it to the time the file was mirrored.
I cannot hand in a solution other than what Frank Donahue suggests, but
when the long filenames are truncated to 8+3 the patchlevel should be
stripped to preserve consistency. In addition to this a
``patchlevel''/``patchlev'' file within the archive (in mft/?) would
give to opportunity to always be able to determine the patchlevel even
when the filename was stripped.
I also suggested that archive files that are the first build remain in
their current format. After all, most archives have only 1 build.
Just to get some feeling:
"v2/alphas/980101/djlsr202-alpha980101.zip"
"v2gnu/mak3769b.zip"
"v2gnu/mak3769b-rebuild1.zip"
"v2gnu/bnu27b__.zip"
--
\ Vik /-_-_-_-_-_-_/
\___/ Heyndrickx /
\ /-_-_-_-_-_-_/ Knight in the Order of the Unsigned Types
- Raw text -