Subject: Re: FYI: upgrading GNU tar
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/10/2002 01:18:53
[ On Thursday, October 10, 2002 at 11:22:33 (+0900), Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote: ]
> Subject: FYI: upgrading GNU tar
> our in-tree GNU tar (gnu/usr.bin/tar) is way too old and has security
> problems. therefore, upgrade is necessary.
> i've prepared new GNU tar under gnu/usr.bin/tar.new (and gnu/dist/tar),
> with security fixes in place, and plan to switch to tar.new (either
> by tweaking Makefile, or by overwriting gnu/usr.bin/tar by tar.new)
> soon. some of the command line options (not the major ones) are
> obsoleted, or changed, due to the upgrade.
> PS: forget about "we need to migrate to pax" discussion for now.
> pax problem is being handled separately, and we need to secure GNU tar in
> our tree anyways (until pax takes over).
Isn't this about the second or maybe even third time such a lame excuse
has been made? If GNU Tar wasn't in the tree there'd be no need to
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098; <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>