Regarding the 3.08.3 source tarballs...

Regarding the 3.08.3 source tarballs...

[Robert Roessler]

I noticed that the [BZIP2] source tarball was slightly smaller than 
that for 3.08.2... how often does software get smaller? :)

So I looked over the two trees, and immediately saw that there are 
almost 400 *more* files in the newer source tree... but that almost 
all of them come from the CVS directories being present in the 3.08.3 
source.

Is this intentional?  I note that the "Root" files do not appear to 
contain the correct data for external anonymous access...

Robert Roessler
roessler@rftp.com
http://www.rftp.com

Re: [Caml-list] Regarding the 3.08.3 source tarballs...

[Damien Doligez]

On Mar 24, 2005, at 00:33, Robert Roessler wrote:

> I noticed that the [BZIP2] source tarball was slightly smaller than 
> that for 3.08.2... how often does software get smaller? :)
>
> So I looked over the two trees, and immediately saw that there are 
> almost 400 *more* files in the newer source tree... but that almost 
> all of them come from the CVS directories being present in the 3.08.3 
> source.

My mistake.  I used the wrong cvs command when preparing the release 
files.
I have uploaded a corrected version.  Removing the spurious files makes 
the
gzipped archive smaller, but the bzipped one bigger.  Now they are both
slightly bigger than the 3.08.2 version :-)

-- Damien

Re: [Caml-list] Regarding the 3.08.3 source tarballs...

[Robert Roessler]

Damien Doligez wrote:

> On Mar 24, 2005, at 00:33, Robert Roessler wrote:
> 
>> I noticed that the [BZIP2] source tarball was slightly smaller than 
>> that for 3.08.2... how often does software get smaller? :)
>>
>> So I looked over the two trees, and immediately saw that there are 
>> almost 400 *more* files in the newer source tree... but that almost 
>> all of them come from the CVS directories being present in the 3.08.3 
>> source.
> 
> 
> My mistake.  I used the wrong cvs command when preparing the release files.
> I have uploaded a corrected version.  Removing the spurious files makes the
> gzipped archive smaller, but the bzipped one bigger.  Now they are both
> slightly bigger than the 3.08.2 version :-)

Thanks, Damien!  The new distribution source tree now has the same 
counts for the files and directories as 3.08.2 - but is a little 
larger, as you say...

As for why no one else commented on this, maybe it was because they 
were waiting (hint, hint) for the Windows binary distribution(s)? :)

But seriously, it has been more than a week now - the MacOS X binary 
distribution is even there already...

Robert Roessler
roessler@rftp.com
http://www.rftp.com