[ seems that this message was not sent to the list - resending ]
Hello,
I found another problem with the current behavior: if tar changes the
permissions of the directory in question, it does not always restore them
back exactly - the permissions seem to be masked by the current umask.
So if the
I would agree. I considered sharing a similar patch, but decided against
it only because it seemed improper to delete code that I didn't
understand the original purpose of.
So if consensus is that the existing code needlessly complicates the way
this argument is handled, I'd gladly withdraw my
[ Please Cc me on replies, I am not subscribed to bug-tar@ ]
Hello Nate,
thank you for the observation and patch. To me the new behavior (introduced by
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/tar.git/commit/?id=14d8fc718f0
in response to
https://www.mail-archive.com/bug-tar@gnu.org/msg05838.html
) looks
I went ahead and tested a patch for this issue. This is my first
contribution, so I hope it is formatted acceptably.
When looking at the extractor source, I wasn't sure about this section
which switches a target directory to a "safe" permission mode then
changes it back afterward. I'm not sure
