On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Paul Eggert <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 01/04/11 15:28, Michael Lawrence wrote: > > Issuing these commands with 1.23: > > > > $ touch foo > > $ tar czfh foo.tar.gz foo bar > > $ tar tzvf foo.tar.gz > > -rw-r--r-- larman/larman 0 2011-01-04 15:06 foo > > -rw-r--r-- larman/larman 0 2011-01-04 15:06 bar > > > > That is as expected > > No doubt you meant that foo should be a symbolic link to tar? > (Your example doesn't say.) > > But in that case, I don't see why you'd expect the behavior > described above. If symlinks are being followed, 'tar' should > behave the same with 'ln foo bar' as it does with 'ln -s foo bar', > which is like this: > > $ touch foo > $ ln foo bar > $ tar czfh foo.tar.gz foo bar > $ tar tzvf foo.tar.gz > -rw-r--r-- eggert/eggert 0 2011-01-05 09:43 foo > hrw-r--r-- eggert/eggert 0 2011-01-05 09:43 bar link to foo > > This behavior is the same for both 1.22 and 1.25 (I just checked). > tar 1.22 mishandles it if "ln -s" is used, but 1.25 gets it right. > > Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I was under the impression that the -h option dereferences symlinks, so that they become regular files inside the archive. Is this not how it is supposed to work? Thanks, Michael > > On 01/05/11 08:09, gene heskett wrote: > > Test cases have been submitted, but no fix progress has been > > noted, and this bug has been out of the refrigerator long enough to > develop > > an odor in this amanda users camp. > > I assume we're talking about a bug in Amanda here? > I don't recall test cases being submitted to bug-tar. > > Where is the Amanda bug report? >
