From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 118555 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2016 18:33:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 118530 invoked by uid 89); 9 Mar 2016 18:33:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,FREEMAIL_REPLYTO_END_DIGIT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:2137, dacoup2@yahoo.com, dacoup2yahoocom, U*dacoup2 X-HELO: nm23.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: from nm23.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (HELO nm23.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com) (98.136.217.6) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 18:32:49 +0000 Received: from [98.137.12.190] by nm23.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Mar 2016 18:32:48 -0000 Received: from [98.137.12.239] by tm11.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Mar 2016 18:32:48 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1047.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 09 Mar 2016 18:32:48 -0000 Received: by 216.39.60.214; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 18:32:47 +0000 Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 18:33:00 -0000 From: Douglas Coup Reply-To: Douglas Coup To: "cygwin@cygwin.com" Message-ID: <160863024.6759470.1457548349068.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <56E05762.8050708@obj-sys.com> References: <56DF65A1.6060305@redhat.com> <56E05762.8050708@obj-sys.com> Subject: Re: Question about tar v1.28 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-03/txt/msg00105.txt.bz2 My apologies if some people see this twice. I didn't see my original reply come through the mailing list. ________________________________ From: Douglas Coup To: dacoup2@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 12:03 PM Subject: Fwd: Re: Question about tar v1.28 -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: Question about tar v1.28 Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 16:52:01 -0700 From: Eric Blake To: cygwin@cygwin.com On 03/08/2016 08:43 AM, Douglas Coup wrote: > Hello Cygwin community. > > I'm observing some unusual behavior with tar v1.28, running as part of > 32-bit Cygwin on a Windows 10 machine. I noticed this in your cygcheck output: > cygdrive prefix /cygdrive system text,noacl,posix=0,auto Why are you text-mounting it? Is your current working directorysomewhere under that text mount? It may be a bug in tar's handling of text-mounted files (ideally, tar should be reopening everything binary in spite of text mounts, but I may have missed a spot). Text mounting is our standard here. I will try to find out why. I changed the /etc/fstab so it specifies "binary" instead of "text", and with that change, the problem doesn't occur. However, the problem doesn't occur with "text" specified on two other systems that use tar v1.27, one running Windows 8.1 and the other running Windows 7. In fact I had used the "tar" command previously on this Windows 10 system with "text" in place without problems. I've done other Cygwin installs since then, so probably either the "tar" command itself got updated or something it depends on got updated, such that now this issue occurs. > A similar sequence on a Windows 8.1 machine running tar v1.27.1 does not > produce this problem. Could be an accidental regression in my cygwin-specific patches betweenthe two versions. But I don't normally use or test on text-mounts, so I'll need confirmation that you are indeed experiencing the problem only in your text mount, before I spend cycles debugging it. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple