Your message dated Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:39:02 -0600 (MDT)
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in 1.15.1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 12 Jan 2002 21:26:41 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jan 12 15:26:41 2002
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from 12-238-101-237.client.attbi.com (yakko.doogie.org)
[12.238.101.237] (uucp)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 16PVfk-0000G2-00; Sat, 12 Jan 2002 15:26:40 -0600
Received: from localhost [127.0.0.1] (uucp)
by yakko.doogie.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 1 (Debian))
id 16PVeJ-0001kR-00; Sat, 12 Jan 2002 15:25:11 -0600
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2002 15:25:11 -0600 (CST)
From: Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-X-Sender: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: tar does not handle long names when in --posix mode
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: tar
Version: 1.13.22-1
Severity: minor
(this is an upstream issue)
Please reference (1), which is also available in the installed info docs that
come with the deb.
This section goes into some detail(but not alot) of how to handle long names.
It lists the old posix limit of 100 char names. However, this limit is no
longer true, and the limit is actully between 100 and 256.
This url also says that for posix tar, if a file is outside the range, that
tar should abort. However, it says that gnu tar should not abort, and fall
back to gnu style extensions. However, this is wrong.
I have attempted to create a tar, with a filename that has a length of 150
chars(with NO slashes). When I use --posix, I can verify that it is output a
posix format tarball(the permission field has the type bits encoded, while for
posix tars, this is not done). When it gets to my long filename, it happily
encodes it using a type of L. This means there are gnu headers in a posix
format tar. This is wrong. I want to tell not NOT to use ANY gnu extensions,
and be strictly posix.
Additionally, when I create a file, that has a directory component of 60 chars
in length, and a filename component of 90 chars in length(within the posix
limits of 100 for the name, and 155 for the prefix), gnu tar STILL doesn't
encode the header in posix format, and STILL insists on inserting the L
header.
1:
http://www.uni-ulm.de/urz/Hard_Software/Dokumentationen/free_unix/tar/tar_8.html#SEC120
note: This problem was discovered while writing abstract archive handling code
in java. I have .ar, binary/compat .cpio, old/posix/gnu .tar support, all
thru the same api.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 128937-done) by bugs.debian.org; 15 Jun 2005 05:38:54 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jun 14 22:38:54 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from winfree.gag.com [192.133.104.8]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1DiQc1-0003dU-00; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 22:38:53 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by winfree.gag.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76426C471;
Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:38:53 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from winfree.gag.com ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (winfree [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 24804-02; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:38:52 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from rover.gag.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by winfree.gag.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 018F0C3AE;
Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:38:52 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by rover.gag.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 4D37FE6D09; Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:39:02 -0600 (MDT)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: fixed in 1.15.1
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:39:02 -0600 (MDT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bdale Garbee)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at gag.com
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_01 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
Testing with 1.15.1 confirms that these problems no longer exist.
Bdale
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
