X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4C767140.7040107@redhat.com>
References: <AANLkTik290bCYpF4z-7HcYtRswE4GAam2C2xrvQJjG9Y AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>	<4C767140 DOT 7040107 AT redhat DOT com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 12:21:40 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTinBD9MnEokkyAXV_fV6BYeuCtiFcGeEk=szua38@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Possible tar version 1.23-1 --remove-files bug.
From: Jeremy Warren <jerwah AT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Yes, sorry, I tried to send an email waving everyone off.  I did not
have available a linux machine with the same version until this
morning, when I downloaded and compiled the 1.23 and found it existed
as well there.  I have re-posted to tar-bug list and await their
response.

Thanks


On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:50 AM, Eric Blake <eblake AT redhat DOT com> wrote:
> On 08/25/2010 10:49 PM, Jeremy Warren wrote:
>>
>> I have duplicated the following behavior on 2 different machines
>> CYGWIN_NT-5.2 1.7.6(0.230/5/3) 2010-08-16 16:06 i686 =A0(Windows 2003 R2
>> Server)
>> CYGWIN_NT-5.1 1.7.5(0.225/5/3) 2010-04-12 19:07 i686 =A0(Windows XP Desk=
top)
>> Both are running tar version 1.23-1 and the problem is 100%
>> reproducible in my environment.
>
> Have you also tested this on Linux? =A0I've done very little in the way of
> cygwin patches (mainly binary mode handling issues), so this is likely an
> upstream regression that affects all platforms. =A0Note: I haven't had ti=
me to
> test it myself, yet.
>
>> It appears from the release notes that some changes were made in
>> 1.23-1 related to the --remove-files argument
>> "** The --remove-files option removes files only if they were
>> succesfully stored in the archive."
>
> --
> Eric Blake =A0 eblake AT redhat DOT com =A0 =A0+1-801-349-2682
> Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
>
> --
> Problem reports: =A0 =A0 =A0 http://cygwin.com/problems.html
> FAQ: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 http://cygwin.com/faq/
> Documentation: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> Unsubscribe info: =A0 =A0 =A0http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
>
>

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple