Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-30 Thread Bdale Garbee
On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 05:27 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Again? I wrote a bug about this years ago with a fix. I think is was > just adding --rsh=/usr/bin/rsh to the configure call. Your patch in response to 185594 added an RSH environment variable definition to the configure invocation.

Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-27 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Martin Zobel-Helas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi Andi, > > On Monday, 27 Mar 2006, you wrote: >> * Martin Zobel-Helas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060324 16:00]: >> > Looks like just rebuilding the security version resolves that error, for >> > whatever reason. Julien and me just cross checked that and

Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-27 Thread Martin Zobel-Helas
Hi Andi, On Monday, 27 Mar 2006, you wrote: > * Martin Zobel-Helas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060324 16:00]: > > Looks like just rebuilding the security version resolves that error, for > > whatever reason. Julien and me just cross checked that and got the same > > result. > > > > If noone minds we reu

Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-27 Thread Andreas Barth
* Martin Zobel-Helas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060324 16:00]: > Looks like just rebuilding the security version resolves that error, for > whatever reason. Julien and me just cross checked that and got the same > result. > > If noone minds we reupload tar with a bumped version number to s-p-u. Is a bi

Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-25 Thread Bdale Garbee
On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 22:07 +0100, Julien Danjou wrote: > Finally, I solved it this way: > > diff -u tar-1.14/debian/rules tar-1.14/debian/rules > --- tar-1.14/debian/rules > +++ tar-1.14/debian/rules > @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ > build-stamp: > dh_testdir > > - $(MAKE) > + RSH="/u

Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-24 Thread Goswin von Brederlow
Julien Danjou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 03:53:03PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: >> Looks like just rebuilding the security version resolves that error, for >> whatever reason. Julien and me just cross checked that and got the same >> result. > > We tried to reproduc

Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-24 Thread Julien Danjou
On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 03:53:03PM +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > Looks like just rebuilding the security version resolves that error, for > whatever reason. Julien and me just cross checked that and got the same > result. We tried to reproduce the bug with zobel, and finally discovered the Tr

Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-24 Thread Bdale Garbee
On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 15:53 +0100, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > If noone minds we reupload tar with a bumped version number to s-p-u. Ok with me. Bdale -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-24 Thread Martin Zobel-Helas
Hi mollo, On Sunday, 19 Mar 2006, you wrote: > On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:19:58 +0100 > using tar 1.14-2.1 > > fw:/home/mathieu# tar --rmt-command=/usr/sbin/rmt -cvf > '[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/mathieu/test.tgz' /etc tar: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/mathieu/test.tgz: Cannot open: Input/output > error ta

Re: bug in tar 1.14-2.1

2006-03-19 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 15:19:58 +0100 Moritz Muehlenhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For the stable distribution (sarge) this problem has been fixed in > version 1.14-2.1. > This upgrade dont allow tar -f [EMAIL PROTECTED]:file syntax to be used. ie. tar -cvf myhost:/dev/st0 /home I've some sa