[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unexpected behaviour when creating a tarball with -h: symlinks are r
From: |
Mirko Vogt |
Subject: |
Re: Unexpected behaviour when creating a tarball with -h: symlinks are replaced with hardlinks |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Aug 2020 20:08:48 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 |
On 8/14/20 4:29 PM, Mirko Vogt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just experienced an unexpected GNU tar behaviour involving "-h".
> From my understanding -h de-references symlinks and includes the files
> the symlinks point to instead of preserving the symlinks.
> This understanding - if I'm not misreading the man page - pretty much
> matches the description of this option.
>
> However what I'm experiencing is - while -h indeed does not preserve the
> symlinks - it replaces them with hard links instead of actually
> de-referencing them and including the original file.
>
> This in particular is an issue, if you want to create a tarball for a
> filesystem which doesn't support any of such link types - e.g. FAT.
>
> So when extracting the tarball (created with -h) on a FAT filesystem,
> I'm experiencing errors like:
>
> tar: dir/target: Cannot hard link to ‘dir/origin’: Operation not permitted
>
> And nothing ends up where a symlink was present when creating the archive.
>
> Tar: tar (GNU tar) 1.30
> OS : Debian/Buster
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> mirko
>
Sorry for the double-post - I didn't get any reply to either of my
mails, but only now saw - looking into the web-archive once again* -
that both of my mails made it to the list.
*I checked the webinterface several times, but also 12 hours later my
mail didn't appear there. Just for explaining why I sent it out once again.
So this very mail is to be ignored. Sorry for the noise.