Subject: Re: bug#43738: Patch file names too long

From: Brett Gilio <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 21:36:44 -0500

Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]> writes:

> There are several patch file names that are too long for ‘tar’, as
> reported during ‘make dist’:
>
> tar: guix-1.0.1.22624-c258f1-dirty/gnu/packages/patches/ocaml-bisect-fix-camlp4-in-another-directory.patch dosiernomo tro longas (maks 99); ne ŝutita
> tar: guix-1.0.1.22624-c258f1-dirty/gnu/packages/patches/audiofile-signature-of-multiplyCheckOverflow.patch dosiernomo tro longas (maks 99); ne ŝutita
> tar: guix-1.0.1.22624-c258f1-dirty/gnu/packages/patches/python2-pygobject-2-gi-info-type-error-domain.patch dosiernomo tro longas (maks 99); ne ŝutita
> tar: guix-1.0.1.22624-c258f1-dirty/gnu/packages/patches/audiofile-division-by-zero-BlockCodec-runPull.patch dosiernomo tro longas (maks 99); ne ŝutita
> tar: guix-1.0.1.22624-c258f1-dirty/gnu/packages/patches/python-robotframework-honor-source-date-epoch.patch dosiernomo tro longas (maks 99); ne ŝutita
>
> ‘guix lint’ reports it as well, but apparently this is easily
> overlooked.
>
> Ludo’.

Does it matter that this is coming from a dirty working tree? Maybe not.

Brett Gilio