Ed Santiago <santi...@redhat.com> wrote: > Curious! It's 100% reproducible on my end. I've attached ante > and post (before/after, but ASCII sortable) to:
Thanks a lot! It did help. > the commit responsible is e89c7a4: Yes, that's right. > ...although I can't for the life of me figure out _why_. Because deletion relies on the value of records_read, affected by that patch. See delete.c:95,106,239. I have reverted e89c7a4 [1]. Regards, Sergey [1] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/tar.git/commit/?id=d437ecf75de2d6fdeb2aed6f45c4b3b16373389b
