On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 08:09:14AM -0600, Matt Kraai wrote: > > I think it is sufficient to remove the calls to umask (0) in > tar.c. We always call chmod on the created file, so the only way > this could cause problems is if the umask of the file disallows > all write permissions. In this case, GNU tar fails so I don't > think we should have to do more. > > Furthermore, I think that it really is a problem with base-files. > Relying on the umask set when debootstrap is run to ensure a > secure system is scary. we can't depend on base-files to cleanup a screwup by busybox tar since the affected directories are not present in base-files (/etc/apm for example). the base-files extraction already appears to fix alot of these, but not all, thats why busybox tar must behave itself. -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
Attachment:
pgpdSHIQPGN_e.pgp
Description: PGP signature