Re: [Bug-tar] segfault getting cwd with --listed-incremental

[Paul Eggert]

On 07/19/10 02:08, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Paul Eggert <address@hidden> wrote:
>> so the two names a/b and a/dot/../b refer to different files.
>> But with tar 1.23.90, tar incorrectly canonicalizes a/dot/../b
>> to a/b, and decides that only one of the two files needs to be
>> archived.
> 
> Could you explain why you believe this is relevant?
> My impression is that an archive from a/b a/dot/../b cannot
> be restored correctly in case that the symlink dot is missing from
> the archive or even archived only after the named two files.

It was just a toy example.  But I think the idea is that a/b a/dot/../b
are both like mount points, i.e., they are both directories that are assumed to
be present during both a dump and a corresponding restore.

> I am still sure that the decision for star (to require "-C dir .")
> for a "dump" is a useful decision that helps to prevent archives
> that cannot be restored.

This sounds like a tradeoff between ease-of-use and idiot-proofing,
which is a design space with more than one reasonable solution.