Re: tar and busybox

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 03:30:18AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 06:13:55PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 02:44:38PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > hi folks
> > > 
> > > Any archive produced by tar 1.13.92 ary not accessible with busybox.
> > > 
> > > Any versions before produced archives in a format called GNU. It only
> > > uses a little subset of available types and moved the other information
> > > into the mode field. This format is neither compatible with POSIX nor
> > > with ustar.
> > > The new tar dropped create support for this format and produces
> > > something between OLDGNU (< tar 1.2 or such) and ustar.
> > > 
> > > busybox only provides limited support for this tar archives and simply
> > > failes because of some discrepances.
> > 
> > Ok, fine, but what is the plan to solve this problem ? 
> > 
> > Any timeline for fixing busybox tar ? Is the patch posted here enough ?
> 
> To my knowledge, the behaviour change was reverted in tar-1.13.92-5, so
> it does not seem necessary to change busybox tar:
> 
> tar (1.13.92-5) unstable; urgency=low
>  
>   * patch from Paul Eggert to revert bogus behavior where POSIXLY_CORRECT
>     set in the environment forced 'pax' format archives, closes: #230872
> 
> http://mail.nongnu.org/archive/html/bug-tar/2004-02/msg00014.html

Well, i was told that this changelog is confusing, and that this tar
behavior is not fixed.

Furthermore, even in the case that the above is false, and that this was
fixed, we would still need to fill RC bugs against all the packages
built with the broken version of tar.

In the meantime, d-i is totally unusable, so it is a rather urgent
matter.

Friendly,

Sven Luther