On 07/19/10 02:08, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Paul Eggert <[email protected]> wrote: >> so the two names a/b and a/dot/../b refer to different files. >> But with tar 1.23.90, tar incorrectly canonicalizes a/dot/../b >> to a/b, and decides that only one of the two files needs to be >> archived. > > Could you explain why you believe this is relevant? > My impression is that an archive from a/b a/dot/../b cannot > be restored correctly in case that the symlink dot is missing from > the archive or even archived only after the named two files.
It was just a toy example. But I think the idea is that a/b a/dot/../b are both like mount points, i.e., they are both directories that are assumed to be present during both a dump and a corresponding restore. > I am still sure that the decision for star (to require "-C dir .") > for a "dump" is a useful decision that helps to prevent archives > that cannot be restored. This sounds like a tradeoff between ease-of-use and idiot-proofing, which is a design space with more than one reasonable solution.
