Tar 1.21

[willimm]

New version.

From NEWS:

New short option -J, an alias for --lzma New option --lzop New option --no-auto-compress, Cancels the effect of previous --auto-compress (-a) option New option --no-null Cancels the effect of previous --null option. Compressed format recognition If tar is unable to determine archive compression format, it falls back to using archive suffix to determine it. VCS support Using --exclude-vcs handles also files used internally by Bazaar, Mercurial and Darcs. Transformation scope flags Name transformation expressions understand additional flags that control type of archive members affected by them. The flags are: r Apply transformation to regular archive members. s Apply transformation to symbolic link targets. h Apply transformation to hard link targets. The corresponding upper-case letters negate the meaning, so that H means do not apply transformation to hard link targets. The scope flags are listed in the third part of a s expression, e.g.: $ tar --transform 's|^{|/usr/local/|S' The default is rsh, which means that transformations are applied to both regular archive members and to the targets of symbolic and hard links. If several transform expressions are used, the default flags can be changed using flags= statement placed before the expressions, e.g.: $ tar --transform 'flags=S;s|}|/usr/local/|' Bugfixes: The --null option disabled handling of tar options in list files. This is fixed. Fixed record size autodetection. If detected record size differs from the expected value (either default, or set on the command line), tar prints a warning if verbosity level is set to 1 or greater, i.e. if either -t or -v option is given.

[willimm]

This was for 7.0.

[Marty Jack]

Test system fails. Problem with reading input from stdin. See also for another example of someone noticing:

​http://packages.gentoo.org/package/app-arch/tar

• Marty

[Matthew Burgess]

Thanks Marty.

That issue is also discussed at ​http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-tar/2008-12/msg00028.html, although upstream currently believe this is the correct behaviour. For the time being, I'm willing to bump the version in LFS and take the gentoo patch, but we'll have to continue to monitor upstream to see what the final outcome is on the discussions.

Regards,

Matt.

[Matthew Burgess]

And if I'd actually read the gentoo patch fully, instead of just the diff, I'd have seen that the upstream thread was already referenced there!

[Matthew Burgess]

Fixed in r8796.