Tim Kientzle <kientzle_at_freebsd.org> writes: > John Hay wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 09:56:34PM -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote: >>> Do we need Joliet extensions on the release ISOs? >>> >>> The reason I ask is a little involved: jkim_at_ recently >>> pointed out to me that tar in -CURRENT can no longer >>> extract symlinks from the release ISOs. >>> >>> I tracked this down to the fact that the release ISOs >>> have both Joliet and RockRidge extensions and tar now >>> supports (and actually prefers) Joliet extensions when >>> it sees them. Joliet doesn't support symlinks, so tar >>> doesn't see symlinks on disks with both kinds of extensions. >> >> What is the reason for prefering Juliet in tar? Can't we >> just swap the preference? > > Because of the way libarchive works internally coupled with > basic differences in how Joliet and RockRidge information > is stored, it turns out that libarchive has to decide > whether or not to use the Joliet information before it > can tell whether RockRidge information is available. > So preferring RockRidge is actually quite difficult. > > I would like to change this, but it's going to be > quite a while before I have enough time to work on it. Sounds like you're out of good options then. Maybe a good temporary workaround would be a switch to disable Joliet support?Received on Sun Jul 19 2009 - 12:19:41 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:52 UTC