Re: [Bug-tar] Issue with tar. Bug file.

[Connor Behan]

On 24/09/13 02:49 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Connor Behan <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> On 23/09/13 02:16 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>> Pulkit Bhuwalka <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This is to report an issue that I have run into while using tar.
>>>>
>>>> *Issue* - tar destroys file when arguments are passed in wrong order
>>>> leading to loss of data.
>>>>
>>>> *Correct tar order* - tar -cvzf "archive_file_name" "file_to_be_archived"
>>>>
>>>> *Order actually passed* - tar - cvzf "file_to_be_archived"
>>>> "archive_file_name"
>>>>
>>>> tar ignores the fact that the "file_to_be_archived" exists and simply
>>>> overwrites it, and then crashes out complaining that "archive_file_name"
>>>> doesn't exist.
>>> ....A problem that is known since before GNU tar exists...
>>>
>>> This is typical "tar" behavior and this is why "star" did never allow this 
>>> in 
>>> case it was called as "star". When keeping compatibility with the SUSv2 
>>> standard,
>>> I see no easy way to work around the problem.
>>>
>>> Jörg
>>>
>> What about the patch I just sent? It would make it slightly harder to
>> trigger this problem. The relevant part of the SUSv2 standard is the
>> line that says archives are written from the beginning instead of after
>> the last file, right? I think the patch still follows that by
>> overwriting existing archives as long as it can dump a file that exists.
> Which patch?
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-tar/2013-09/msg00038.html

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature