Re: [Bug-tar] listed-incremental broken in 1.25 on Solaris 10

[Markus Duft]

On 02/02/2011 08:28 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 02/01/11 23:28, Markus Duft wrote:
>> i don't think it's "only" a bug in the filesystem
> 
> Yes, most likely it isn't "just" a bug in the file system.
> tar has changed the way that it sets file time stamps,
> in order to avoid certain security holes.  It now sets
> the before closing the file rather than after.  Most
> likely your file system is buggy, and 'close' is mistakenly
> changing the file's time stamp to the wrong value.
> 
> We can't simply revert the change in tar, because
> that would reintroduce the security holes.  However, perhaps
> there is a way to work around the problem on buggy file systems.
> 
> One possibility is to invoke fsync(fd) just before close(fd).
> Perhaps you can try that, on your buggy system, to see if
> that works around the problem.  For performance reasons,
> we'd only want to do fsync on buggy file systems, but the
> first step is to see whether fsync works around the bug
> at all.

fsync() does help on interix yes; i still need a response on whether it fixes 
the misbehaviour on linux too (still don't know which filesystem darkside has).

which filesystem is _not_ buggy in this sense?

markus