On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Joerg Schilling < [email protected]> wrote:
> Michael Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > What is bar in the first case? > > > > > > > > Sorry, somehow this: > > > > $ ln -s foo bar > > > > Got lost in the cut and paste. > > In that case, I would expect tar to detect a hard link between foo and bar > in > case that -h is used, but carefully read the rest to understand the full > background. > > Specifying -h results in using stat() instead of lstat() and this makes it > impossible for tar to distinct between foo and bar as both files return the > same stat() structure. > > However, tar does not asume a hard link in case that the link count for foo > is > less than two. > > For this reason, something like: > > 0 -rw-r--r-- root/bs Jan 5 22:01 2011 foo > 0 -rw-r--r-- root/bs Jan 5 22:01 2011 bar > > is the expected result in case that foo has no other hard links. > > Ok. I'm a little confused by this response. If I understand you correctly, with -h there should be no links within the archive, i.e., there are two copies of foo in the archive. This is not how tar >= 1.24 behaves. Thanks, Michael Jörg > > -- > > EMail:[email protected]<email%[email protected]>(home) > Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin > [email protected] (uni) > [email protected] (work) Blog: > http://schily.blogspot.com/ > URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily >
