Sridhar Ratnakumar <sridh...@activestate.com> added the comment: [David] I don't see why the tarfile case should be different from the tar case. (...)
As I explained, Viz: [quote]'(...)the very reason to write a program to extract tarball (instead of doing it manually) is to automate it .. which automation is *more effective and simple* if ``extractall`` had a flag such as readaccess=True'[endquote] (emphasis added) [David] You can "always chmod it later" in python, too (with os.walk and os.chmod). (...) Of course, I can. Or: EXECUTE = 0100 READ = 0400 dir_perm = EXECUTE file_perm = EXECUTE | READ for tarinfo in f.getmembers(): tarinfo.mode |= (dir_perm if tarinfo.isdir() else file_perm) As you can see, for a tarfile with huge list of files.. this can be a performance issue. [David] (...) Perhaps the real need is for a recursive chmod in shutil? The real need is to fix the weird permissions on some tarballs (such as generator_tools-0.3.5.tar.gz in PyPI and the above mentioned pyopenssl tarball). This need usually leads to designing workarounds. I just think it is not simple (as in, keeping the code off from such hacks that are tangential to the problem being solved) and effective (as in, not having to deal with potential unintended side effects like bugs in the post-fix chmoding or in the pre-fix tarinfo mode modifications). Hence the feature request. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue6196> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com