Le 10/09/2015 14:53, Guillem Jover a écrit : >> $ umask 0002 >> $ apt-get source hello >> $ ll hello-2.10|head -n5 >> total 1008K >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 steph steph 92K nov. 16 2014 ABOUT-NLS >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 steph steph 43K nov. 16 2014 aclocal.m4 >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 steph steph 593 juil. 19 2014 AUTHORS >> drwxrwxr-x 3 steph steph 4,0K nov. 16 2014 build-aux >> $ rm -rf hello-2.10 >> $ tar xf hello_2.10.orig.tar.gz >> $ ll hello-2.10|head -n5 >> total 1004K >> -rw-r--r-- 1 steph steph 92K nov. 16 2014 ABOUT-NLS >> -rw-r--r-- 1 steph steph 43K nov. 16 2014 aclocal.m4 >> -rw-r--r-- 1 steph steph 593 juil. 19 2014 AUTHORS >> drwxr-xr-x 3 steph steph 4,0K nov. 16 2014 build-aux >> >> I expect the same behaviour w.r.t. permissions with dpkg-source and >> tar. > > Hmmm, well, tar only fully preserves owners and permissions when running > as root. [...]
Owners are not preserved, but permissions are. The commands above were run as non-root. > [...] I did some digging on this and now I'm a bit conflicted, this > was implemente on purpose due to bugs #390915 and #207289. > > The actual commit is > <http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/dpkg/dpkg.git/commit/?id=e818d3b0cfc363ee7624c7a61f3e07f837312ad1>. > > I'll have to think about it a bit more I guess. Besides, the behaviour is documented in dpkg-source's manual (--extract section). But I don't agree with it. CC'ing Ian Jackson, as he seems to be the author of this. Maybe he can explain this behaviour. Concerning #390915, I don't agree with the way the original (LP #51468) bug was fixed. Again, plain tar behaves correctly IMHO. Concerning #207289, I would say that the upstream tarball was at fault and repacking it was the right solution. Cheers, -- Stéphane
