Subject: re: pax questions...
To: None <email@example.com>
From: matthew green <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/02/1999 04:08:34
In message <email@example.com>, matthew green writes:
>i have commited a change to options.h (rev1.5) that should fix this bug
this is now rev 1.6; mycroft pointed out i had my logic reversed.
>(which would allow -A with -rw; reading the code shows that it *always*
>does the equivalent of -A anyway).
I'm not sure I follow. I thought this would be a mildly controversial change,
because it changes the *DEFAULT* behavior. '-A' is *honor* absolute paths,
or at least, was in my code. With my change, if you *don't* specify '-A',
you don't get absolute paths.
that's how it is right now.
I can't figure out how '-rw' could 'honor absolute paths' meaningfully; the
entire point of it is to write into a named destination directory, rather than
exactly. the bug was that "pax -rwA" was allowed.
I'm a little confused. I'm also not clear on why Aflag is getting set in -P
mode; I don't see the connection.
tar -P? from the gnu tar man page:
--absolute-paths Don't strip leading `/'s from file names.