Thank you, Cheng, for your reply.

How important is it use gnu-tar in this process?
Release documentation doesn’t provide enough information on this.

Do we really need RC3 for this?

Thanks.

On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 9:13 PM [email protected] <[email protected]>
wrote:

> @gjacoby, Thank you very much for the explaination,
>
>
> When I untar the apache-phoenix-4.14.3-HBase-1.4-src.tar.gz using tar (GNU
> tar) 1.23 under Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.6, I got
> following warnings for
> every subdirectory:
> tar: Ignoring unknown extended header keyword `SCHILY.dev'
> tar: Ignoring unknown extended header keyword `SCHILY.ino'
> tar: Ignoring unknown extended header keyword `SCHILY.nlink'
>
>
> When I untared the same src tar.gz using WinRAR 3.7.0 under windows 7, I
> got "PaxHeader" directory in every subdirectory.
>
> Furthermore, when I untar apache-phoenix-4.14.2-HBase-1.4-src.tar.gz  or
> other earlier versions in the same environment, I did not see the warnings
> or the "PaxHeader" directory.
>
>
>
>
>
> At 2019-08-20 07:24:53, "Geoffrey Jacoby" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Oops, forgot to add the footnote above: [1]
> >https://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_chapter/tar_8.html#SEC146
> >
> >On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 4:23 PM Geoffrey Jacoby <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Looking at this some more, I created Docker containers for CentOS and
> >> Ubuntu and verified that I could use the GNU version of tar they
> included
> >> to successfully untar the tarball in the RC. (There were some extraneous
> >> warnings -- apparently BSD tar uses a few headers that GNU tar doesn't
> >> understand -- but they didn't affect the output.)
> >>
> >> The GNU docs specify that the POSIX extensions to the tar format is
> >> supported in 1.14 or later[1], and recent CentOS and Ubuntu releases
> have
> >> included tar versions far later than that, such as 1.26 in CentOS.
> >>
> >> So far RC2 still seems OK to me, but very curious to know what the
> >> environment is where it's failing. Once we know that we can judge how
> >> serious it is. Worst case, we can do an RC3 using GNU tar to make the
> >> tarballs.
> >>
> >> Geoffrey
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 9:45 AM Geoffrey Jacoby <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Cheng is a PMC member and has a binding vote. Just as a reminder, the
> >>> Apache policy for releases is at least 3 +1s and more positive votes
> than
> >>> negative; releases can't be vetoed the way patches can.[1] That said,
> we've
> >>> always taken -1s very seriously, and I agree that if the tarball is
> corrupt
> >>> that would be a reason for sinking the RC.
> >>>
> >>> Like Swaroopa, I can't reproduce the problem. I've untarred the source
> on
> >>> several different machines over the past week or so and not seen the
> >>> PaxHeaders that Cheng is seeing. It may be relevant that all the
> machines
> >>> I've done this on have been Macs, which use the BSD tar.
> >>>
> >>> Some searching shows that PaxHeaders are apparently a POSIX extension
> to
> >>> the tarball standard [2] and that a tar utility that doesn't
> understand the
> >>> extension may manifest the extra headers as extra files.
> >>>
> >>> Cheng, could you please share what version of tar or other
> decompression
> >>> tool you're using to help us figure this out?
> >>>
> >>> Geoffrey
> >>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
> >>> [2] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/34688392/paxheaders-in-tarball
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 9:00 AM swaroopa kadam <
> >>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Thank you all who voted.
> >>>>
> >>>> [email protected] - I downloaded and untarred the tar files on
> Linux,
> >>>> macOS, and windows. I didn't see the "PaxHeader" in any environment.
> >>>> Is your -1 binding or non-binding?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 7:48 AM [email protected] <
> [email protected]
> >>>> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> >
> >>>> > -1,
> >>>> > I am very strange to find that there is a "PaxHeader" directory in
> >>>> every
> >>>> > subdirectory in the
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/phoenix/apache-phoenix-4.14.3-HBase-1.3-rc2/src/apache-phoenix-4.14.3-HBase-1.3-src.tar.gz
> >>>> > and
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/phoenix/apache-phoenix-4.14.3-HBase-1.4-rc2/src/apache-phoenix-4.14.3-HBase-1.4-src.tar.gz
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > At 2019-08-15 01:24:16, "swaroopa kadam" <
> [email protected]>
> >>>> > wrote:
> >>>> > >Hello Everyone,
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 4.14.3 RC2. This is a
> >>>> patch
> >>>> > >release of Phoenix 4.14 and is compatible with Apache HBase 1.3 and
> >>>> > >1.4. The release includes both a source-only release and a
> convenience
> >>>> > >binary
> >>>> > >release for each supported HBase version.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >This release includes critical bug fixes and improvements for
> >>>> secondary
> >>>> > >indexes -- making them self-consistent.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found
> >>>> at:
> >>>> > >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/phoenix/apache-phoenix-4.14.3-HBase-1.3-rc2/src/
> >>>> > >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/phoenix/apache-phoenix-4.14.3-HBase-1.4-rc2/src/
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >The binary artifacts can be found at:
> >>>> > >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/phoenix/apache-phoenix-4.14.3-HBase-1.3-rc2/bin/
> >>>> > >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/phoenix/apache-phoenix-4.14.3-HBase-1.4-rc2/bin/
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >For a complete list of changes, see:
> >>>> > >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12315120&version=12345601
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >Artifacts are signed with my "CODE SIGNING KEY": 48B7807D95F127B5
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >KEYS file available here:
> >>>> > >https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/phoenix/KEYS
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >The tag to be voted upon:
> >>>> > >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=phoenix.git;a=commit;h=e2993552dc88cb7fc59fc0dfdaa2876ac260886c
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=phoenix.git;a=commit;h=eb5424573bd2f5f247a61d1a28da81fb92f06ec6
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >[ ] +1 approve
> >>>> > >[ ] +0 no opinion
> >>>> > >[ ] -1 disapprove (and the reason why)
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >Thanks,
> >>>> > >The Apache Phoenix Team
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >--
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >Swaroopa Kadam
> >>>> > >[image: https://]about.me/swaroopa_kadam
> >>>> > ><
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> https://about.me/swaroopa_kadam?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api
> >>>> > >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Swaroopa Kadam
> >>>> [image: https://]about.me/swaroopa_kadam
> >>>> <
> >>>>
> https://about.me/swaroopa_kadam?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>
>
-- 


Swaroopa Kadam
[image: https://]about.me/swaroopa_kadam
<https://about.me/swaroopa_kadam?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=gmail_api>

Reply via email to