Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > We have similar code in many places -- because evidently nobody > thought it would be a good idea to have all the logic for reading and > writing tarfiles in a centralized location rather than having many > copies of it -- and typically it's written to pad the block out to a > multiple of 512 bytes. But here, the file is 0 bytes long, and then we > add 511 zero bytes. This results in a tarfile whose length is not a > multiple of the TAR block size:
Bleah. Whether or not the nearest copy of tar happens to spit up on that, it's a clear violation of the POSIX standard for tar files. I'd vote for back-patching your 0001. I'd lean mildly to holding 0002 until after we branch. It probably won't break anything, but it probably won't fix anything either. regards, tom lane