Luke Mewburn <lukem@netbsd.org> writes:
> When pax is fixed (in a sane way) to do the right thing with symlinks
> to directories, we can then reconsider the issue of having /home back
> in the base distribution, taking into account the other concerns raised.

As a first strawman, I would propose that in the "unlink before
unpacking" case (our default for tar pax etc these days), that the
system refuse to replace a node with a node of a different type --
i.e. refuse to replace a file with a directory, or a symlink with a
file or directory, etc. If one explicitly gave the --unlink directory
it would ignore this, thus allowing you to blow things away.

This doesn't seem exactly correct, though. It would refuse to damage
things, but at the expense of not upgrading at all.

An alternative might be to ask pax/tar to follow the symlink while
unpacking.

Comments?

-- 
Perry E. Metzger		perry@piermont.com