René Scharfe <[email protected]> writes: >> Wow. The choice of %07o is as old as the very original of tar-tree >> implementation in our codebase, starting at ae64bbc1 ("tar-tree: >> Introduce write_entry()", 2006-03-25). > > Actually it's already in 731ab9ccf2 ("[PATCH] create tar archives of > tree on the fly", 2005-04-28).
Yup, after viewing "git show ae64bbc1" I found out the commit added a new helper to do %07o without touching the existing one that did the same. Problem with relying on "git blame" too much X-<. >> I think the updated behaviour matches Wikipedia [*1*] where it >> spells out that 6 octal is followed by a NUL and a SP; it also says >> various implementations do not adhere to this format---perhaps they >> meant us ;-) > > OpenBSD's pax(1) does the same if I read > https://github.com/openbsd/src/blob/master/bin/pax/tar.c correctly. What's more interesting is that their verifier in tar_id() compares the ulong value read from textual checksum with the ulong value computed. I agree with you that it would be the more robust way than what is done by squshfs tools (ng).
