From dwc@sac.sfbay.sun.com Fri Aug 10 16:31:50 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7ANVnBT001322 for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7ANTQg4011840; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 00:29:27 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMK00A03ZX2ZA00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 17:29:26 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.145.154.35]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMK0040KZX0HY40@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 17:29:25 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (sac.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.132]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7ANTOIT002723; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:29:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7ANViOA001317; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:31:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dwc@localhost) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id l7ANViwr001313; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:31:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:31:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Cragun Subject: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: PSARC-ext@sun.com Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <200708102331.l7ANViwr001313@sac.sfbay.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 5520 Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.64 07/13/07 SMI This information is Copyright 2007 Sun Microsystems 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: Author: Cynthia Eastham 1.3 Date of This Document: 10 August, 2007 4. Technical Description This case adds a new command line option '-/' to cpio(1), pax(1), and '/' function modifier to tar(1), to support the read-write extended system attributes added in PSARC case 2007/315. I. Overview The Extensible Attribute Interfaces (PSARC/2007/315) project introduced a number of extended system attributes. The system utilities need to be able to display and manipulate these new attributes. This fasttrack case adds a new option ('-/') to the utilities cpio(1) and pax(1), and the new function modifier ('/') to the tar(1) utility, to create and restore archives of files with the read-write extended system attributes. The option name '/' was chosen to match its use in the ls utility (see PSARC/2007/394). The project team, therefore, asks for a waiver to CLIP Guideline #3 ("Each option name should be a single alphanumeric character (the alnum character classification) from the portable character set. ...") so the use of this option name can be consistent across all of the affected utilities. Note: this project is to archive read-write extended system attribute files. A follow-on project is being considered which will allow the archival of individual extended system attributes to be stored in an archive and to be ignored, used as-is, or modified on an individual file when files are extracted from an archive. II. Release Binding The project team requests a minor release binding. III. Details When this option is specified on a command line that archives data, the read-write extended system attribute files will be archived. When this option is specified on a command line extracting archived data, the read-write extended system attribute files will be extracted. If the '@' function modifier is also specified on the command line, then in addition to adding extended attribute files of the specified source file(s) to the archive, read-write extended system attributes files associated with extended attribute files will also be added to the archive. For example, using one of the following methods to create an archive: tar c@/f archive_file source_file or echo "source_file" | cpio -o@/ > archive_file or pax -w@/f archive_file source_file the archive_file will contain the source_file, the extended attributes of source_file, and the read-write extended system attribute files associated with source_file and the extended attributes of source_file. and using one of the following methods to extract files from an archive: tar x@/f archive_file or cpio -icd@/ < archive_file or pax -r@/f archive_file the source_file, the extended attributes of source_file, and the read-write extended system attribute files associated with source_file and extended attributes of source_file, will be extracted provided the user has the permissions and the privileges needed to set extended system attributes. The extended system attribute files will be archived using the existing method of archiving extended attribute files documented in PSARC/1999/209 Extended File Attributes. See the diff-marked, updated cpio(1) and tar(1) man pages in this case's materials directory for a detailed description of this option. Due to a major re-work of the pax(1) man page currently under way by the documentation group, suggested changes for pax(1), rather than a diff-marked man page are contained within the materials directory. IV. Interfaces IV.1 Exported Interfaces ______________________________________ | Interface |Classification| |_____________________|______________| |/usr/bin/cpio | | |/usr/bin/pax | Committed | |/usr/bin/tar | | |_____________________|______________| IV.2 Imported Interfaces _________________________________________________________________ | Interface | Classification | Comments | |================================================================| | _PC_SATTR_ENABLED | Consolidation | [f]pathconf() variables | | _PC_SATTR_EXISTS | Private | from PSARC/2007/315. | |_____________________+________________+_________________________| The above are mentioned here only to register use of these interfaces. 5. References CR 6590344 cpio(1) should support filesystem attributes proposed in PSARC/2007/315 CR 6590345 pax(1) should support filesystem attributes proposed in PSARC/2007/315 CR 6590347 tar(1) should support filesystem attributes proposed in PSARC/2007/315 PSARC/1999/209 Extended File Attributes PSARC/1999/645 Command Line Interface (CLIP) PSARC/2006/715 CIFS Service PSARC/2007/315 Extensible Attribute Interfaces PSARC/2007/394 ls(1) new command line options '-/' and '-%': CIFS system attributes support PSARC/2007/410 Add system attribute support to chmod(1) PSARC/2007/423 CIFS system attributes support for cp(1), pack(1), unpack(1), compress(1), and uncompress(1) 6. Resources and Schedule 6.4. Steering Committee requested information 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: ON 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack 6.6. ARC Exposure: open From dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com Fri Aug 10 22:35:09 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7B5Z8uc004984 for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:35:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7B5Wgoe001042; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:32:44 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JML00J07GQJZN00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:32:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.146.226.64]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JML00BYWGQJXV30@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:32:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l7B5WhlC013645; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:32:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dwc@localhost) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/Submit) id l7B5Wggn013644; Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:32:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 22:32:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Cragun Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: PSARC-ext@sun.com Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 6084 I apologize. I grabbed the wrong project spec file when I submitted this case for Cindy. This is the updated spec. An asterisk appears at the end of changed lines. The nominal timer remains set for August 17th. This update is also present in the materials directory in the file named "spec". - Don Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.64 07/13/07 SMI This information is Copyright 2007 Sun Microsystems 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: Author: Cynthia Eastham 1.3 Date of This Document: 10 August, 2007 4. Technical Description This case adds a new command line option '-/' to cpio(1), pax(1), and '/' function modifier to tar(1), to support the read-write extended system attributes added in PSARC case 2007/315. I. Overview The Extensible Attribute Interfaces (PSARC/2007/315) project introduced a number of extended system attributes. The system utilities need to be able to display and manipulate these new attributes. This fasttrack case adds a new option ('-/') to the utilities cpio(1) and pax(1), and the new function modifier ('/') to the tar(1) utility, to create and restore archives of files with the read-write extended system attributes. The option name '/' was chosen to match its use in the ls utility (see PSARC/2007/394). The project team, therefore, asks for a waiver to CLIP Guideline #3 ("Each option name should be a single alphanumeric character (the alnum character classification) from the portable character set. ...") so the use of this option name can be consistent across all of the affected utilities. Note: this project is to archive read-write extended system attribute files. A follow-on project is being considered which will allow the archival of individual extended system attributes to be stored in an archive and to be ignored, used as-is, or modified on an individual file when files are extracted from an archive. II. Release Binding The project team requests a minor release binding. III. Details When this option is specified on a command line that archives data, the read-write extended system attribute files will be archived. When this option is specified on a command line extracting archived data, the read-write extended system attribute files will be extracted. If the '@' function modifier is also specified on the command line, then in addition to adding or extracting extended attribute files of the * specified source file(s) to or from the archive, read-write extended * system attributes files associated with extended attribute files will * also be added to or extracted from the archive. * For example, using one of the following methods to create an archive: tar c@/f archive_file source_file or echo "source_file" | cpio -o@/ > archive_file or pax -w@/ -f archive_file source_file * the archive_file will contain the source_file, the extended attributes of source_file, and the read-write extended system attribute files associated with source_file and the extended attributes of source_file. Using one of the following methods to extract files from an archive: * tar x@/f archive_file or cpio -icd@/ < archive_file or pax -r@/ -f archive_file * the source_file, the extended attributes of source_file, and the read-write extended system attribute files associated with source_file and extended attributes of source_file, will be extracted provided the user has the permissions and the privileges needed to set extended system attributes. The extended system attribute files will be archived using the existing method of archiving extended attribute files documented in PSARC/1999/209 Extended File Attributes. See the diff-marked, updated cpio(1), tar(1), and archives(3HEAD) man * pages in this case's materials directory for a detailed description of * this option. Due to a major re-work of the pax(1) man page currently * under way by the documentation group, suggested changes for pax(1), * rather than a diff-marked man page are contained within the materials * directory. * IV. Interfaces IV.1 Exported Interfaces ______________________________________ | Interface |Classification| |_____________________|______________| |/usr/bin/cpio | | |/usr/bin/pax | Committed | |/usr/bin/tar | | |_____________________|______________| IV.2 Imported Interfaces _________________________________________________________________ | Interface | Classification | Comments | |================================================================| | _PC_SATTR_ENABLED | Consolidation | [f]pathconf() variables | | _PC_SATTR_EXISTS | Private | from PSARC/2007/315. | |_____________________+________________+_________________________| The above are mentioned here only to register use of these interfaces. 5. References CR 6590344 cpio(1) should support filesystem attributes proposed in PSARC/2007/315 CR 6590345 pax(1) should support filesystem attributes proposed in PSARC/2007/315 CR 6590347 tar(1) should support filesystem attributes proposed in PSARC/2007/315 PSARC/1999/209 Extended File Attributes PSARC/1999/645 Command Line Interface (CLIP) PSARC/2006/715 CIFS Service PSARC/2007/315 Extensible Attribute Interfaces PSARC/2007/394 ls(1) new command line options '-/' and '-%': CIFS system attributes support PSARC/2007/410 Add system attribute support to chmod(1) PSARC/2007/423 CIFS system attributes support for cp(1), pack(1), unpack(1), compress(1), and uncompress(1) 6. Resources and Schedule 6.4. Steering Committee requested information 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: ON 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack 6.6. ARC Exposure: open From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Sat Aug 11 03:55:18 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7BAtHGR009224 for ; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 03:55:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7BAqtkP000945; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 03:52:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JML00301VK79200@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 03:52:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JML00KKKVK6AN80@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 03:52:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7BAqrfO015124; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 10:52:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms49es.sun.com ([160.41.221.233] [160.41.221.233]) by relay43i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-823938; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 10:52:53 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72] [192.5.209.72]) by mms49es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1793652; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 10:52:53 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-7671310; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 10:52:53 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7BAqqgx011210; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:52:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7BAqpjE011092 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:52:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7BAqohl014120; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:52:51 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:52:50 +0200 Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:49:54 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708102331.l7ANViwr001313@sac.sfbay.sun.com> To: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46bd9452.irMM9/ZTnJiskV2a%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708102331.l7ANViwr001313@sac.sfbay.sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2007 10:52:50.0823 (UTC) FILETIME=[C305C170:01C7DC05] Status: RO Content-Length: 1579 Don Cragun wrote: > Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.64 07/13/07 SMI > This information is Copyright 2007 Sun Microsystems > 1. Introduction > 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: > CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) > 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: > Author: Cynthia Eastham > 1.3 Date of This Document: > 10 August, 2007 > 4. Technical Description > > This case adds a new command line option '-/' to cpio(1), pax(1), and > '/' function modifier to tar(1), to support the read-write extended > system attributes added in PSARC case 2007/315. Please stop this kind of Salami tactic! If you like to make a greater change, prepare _everything_ from the same category and then start a PSARC. Please note also: ARC cases are intended to be _ready_ for discussion. As your proposal does not include the archive format changes that are needed to support the new options, you need to do some homework before you may present this case. Keep in mind that it is not acceptable to have archive enhancements that are not compatible with already existing archive format enhancements from other programs. See: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/star/star.4.html SCHILY.fflags for more information. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Sat Aug 11 04:04:33 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7BB4WgF009372 for ; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 04:04:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7BB21e4021015; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:02:06 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JML00A03VZGSR00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 04:02:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JML00BYQVZGY5D0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 04:02:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay41i.sun.com ([192.5.209.70]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7BB0Q6b016530; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 11:02:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms49es.sun.com ([160.41.221.233] [160.41.221.233]) by relay41i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-306130; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 11:02:04 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74] [192.5.209.74]) by mms49es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1801917; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 11:02:04 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.22] [153.96.1.22]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-7734901; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 11:02:03 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7BB22Ji014222; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:02:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7BB20kV014131 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:02:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7BB20O7014665; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:02:00 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:02:00 +0200 Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:59:03 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> To: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2007 11:02:00.0150 (UTC) FILETIME=[0A726760:01C7DC07] Status: RO Content-Length: 582 Don Cragun wrote: > > 6. Resources and Schedule > 6.4. Steering Committee requested information > 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: > ON > 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack This cannot be a fasttrack, please make a halfway complete proposal first! Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com Sat Aug 11 12:28:24 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7BJSOOu014273 for ; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:28:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7BJQ0Kn012637; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:26:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMM00L05JBC9C00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:26:00 -0600 (MDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.146.226.64]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMM00A5WJBBYF80@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:26:00 -0600 (MDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l7BJPxhO014128; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:25:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dwc@localhost) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/Submit) id l7BJPxNR014127; Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:25:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:25:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Cragun Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de, PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <200708111925.l7BJPxNR014127@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 1838 >Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:49:54 +0200 >From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) > >Don Cragun wrote: >> 4. Technical Description >> >> This case adds a new command line option '-/' to cpio(1), pax(1), and >> '/' function modifier to tar(1), to support the read-write extended >> system attributes added in PSARC case 2007/315. > ... ... ... > >Please note also: ARC cases are intended to be _ready_ for discussion. >As your proposal does not include the archive format changes that are needed to >support the new options, you need to do some homework before you may present >this case. No archive format changes are being proposed by this case. The archive format introduced by the extended attributes case (PSARC/1999/209) was integrated into the cpio and tar sources over six years ago (07/29/2001). The new headers introduced at that time are also used for the extended system attributes for which this case adds support. > >Keep in mind that it is not acceptable to have archive enhancements that are not >compatible with already existing archive format enhancements from other >programs. See: > >http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/star/star.4.html There is no incompatibility here. The web page above includes: #define LF_EXTATTR 'E' /* Solaris Extended Attribute File */ which is the archive format used by this case. If you are concerned that external to Sun applications don't have access to the functions defined by PSARC/2007/315 (which defines them to be consolidation private and are used to process extended system attributes), I would suggest that you try to convince the submitter of that case to make them public. Those interfaces are not controlled by the project team that submitted this case. - Don > >SCHILY.fflags > >for more information. > >Jörg From jek3@Sun.COM Mon Aug 13 18:13:43 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7E1DgM4029505 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:13:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7E1BDgx017978; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 02:11:15 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMQ0060LOMP3K00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:11:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.63]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMQ00A3VOMMM3B0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:11:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.150.12.124] (vpn-129-150-12-124.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.12.124]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7E1B4gT525478; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:11:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:08:13 -1000 From: Joseph Kowalski Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46bd9452.irMM9/ZTnJiskV2a%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46C1007D.7030903@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708102331.l7ANViwr001313@sac.sfbay.sun.com> <46bd9452.irMM9/ZTnJiskV2a%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060925) Status: RO Content-Length: 648 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Keep in mind that it is not acceptable to have archive enhancements that are not > compatible with already existing archive format enhancements from other > programs. See: > > http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/star/star.4.html > Why is this unacceptable? This becomes close to a requirement for appropriate programs, which are in Solaris. For programs sitting in some arbitrary server or ~home its nothing more than a nice thing for significant programs, for some very arbitrary definition of "significant". Since this is nothing more than a "nice thing", one should be "nice" rather than yelling. - jek3 From jek3@sun.com Mon Aug 13 18:21:03 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7E1L36F029528 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:21:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7E1Icjc000277; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:18:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMQ00L1POZ20900@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:18:38 -0600 (MDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.63]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMQ009EVOZ0TZ70@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:18:36 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.150.12.124] (vpn-129-150-12-124.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.12.124]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7E1IUc1526096; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:15:40 -1000 From: Joseph Kowalski Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060925) Status: RO Content-Length: 968 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Don Cragun wrote: > > >> 6. Resources and Schedule >> 6.4. Steering Committee requested information >> 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: >> ON >> 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack >> > > This cannot be a fasttrack, please make a halfway complete proposal first! > > Jörg > The project gets to propose the type of review. This program choose to propose "fast-track". The ARC can derail that case. That makes the a full case. However, it sounds like you desire a completely different case. The ARC can expand or contract the proposed case. That can happen in either a fast-track or a regular case. If you want that different case, you need to propose an other project. If they appear at nearly the same time, the ARC will usually dictate that the two proposals be reconciled. There are also considerations along "resources" and "time", but those aren't really the concern of the ARC. - jek3 From gww@eng.sun.com Mon Aug 13 18:36:58 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7E1av36029677 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:36:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7E1YRfJ026259; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:34:31 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMQ00701PPGNV00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:34:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from engmail3mpk.sfbay.Sun.COM ([129.146.11.26]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMQ00A95PPGMAC0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:34:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by engmail3mpk.sfbay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7E1YRR6007641; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l7E1WJBl001259; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:32:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id l7E1WJCd001258; Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:32:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:32:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de, jek3@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 1007 > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Keep in mind that it is not acceptable to have archive enhancements that are not > > compatible with already existing archive format enhancements from other > > programs. See: > > > > http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/star/star.4.html > > > Why is this unacceptable? > > This becomes close to a requirement for appropriate programs, which > are in Solaris. For programs sitting in some arbitrary server or ~home > its nothing more than a nice thing for significant programs, for some > very arbitrary definition of "significant". Since this is nothing more > than a "nice thing", one should be "nice" rather than yelling. Unless I'm off base, I think there's a misunderstanding by the question of what's happening. Various archive programs have been able to archive a files attribute files since attribute files were introduced. The -/ option selects those attribute files that include system attributes. It is analgous to -@ in that respect. Gary.. From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Tue Aug 14 06:56:30 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7EDuTn0013866 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 06:56:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7EDrtSf017142; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:54:00 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMR00807NXYCG00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 06:53:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.98.34]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMR00872NXX4V00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 06:53:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7EDlu8Y009920; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:53:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms48es.sun.com ([160.41.221.231] [160.41.221.231]) by relay42i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-988006; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:53:56 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74] [192.5.209.74]) by mms48es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2911279; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:53:56 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.22] [153.96.1.22]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-9820101; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:53:56 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7EDrtFD023515; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:53:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7EDrreF023462 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:53:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7EDrrUY009256; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:53:53 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:53:53 +0200 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:50:54 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C1007D.7030903@sun.com> To: jek3@Sun.COM Cc: PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c1b33e.FAyAujt0iT9PXTte%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708102331.l7ANViwr001313@sac.sfbay.sun.com> <46bd9452.irMM9/ZTnJiskV2a%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1007D.7030903@sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2007 13:53:53.0639 (UTC) FILETIME=[8D012F70:01C7DE7A] Status: RO Content-Length: 1440 Joseph Kowalski wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Keep in mind that it is not acceptable to have archive enhancements that are not > > compatible with already existing archive format enhancements from other > > programs. See: > > > > http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/star/star.4.html > > > Why is this unacceptable? > > This becomes close to a requirement for appropriate programs, which > are in Solaris. For programs sitting in some arbitrary server or ~home > its nothing more than a nice thing for significant programs, for some > very arbitrary definition of "significant". Since this is nothing more > than a "nice thing", one should be "nice" rather than yelling. It is not acceptable to add features in a way that is not compatible to existing applications. Since 6 years, these kind of attributes are implemented using POSIX.1-2001 extended tar extensions and not using POSIX.1-1988 extensions. The problem with POSIX.1-1988 extemsions is that they have no vendor tag and thus create problems with other implementations that do not know what a specific POSIX.1-1988 tar extemsions should mean. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Tue Aug 14 06:57:41 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7EDveF1013885 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 06:57:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7EDsjeC017384; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:55:11 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMR00833NZWEZ00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 06:55:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.43.22]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMR0089KNZT4V00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 06:55:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74]) by sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7EDfxYG005090; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:55:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms48es.sun.com ([160.41.221.231] [160.41.221.231]) by relay43i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1004398; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:55:04 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay44i.sun.com ([192.5.209.118] [192.5.209.118]) by mms48es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2912541; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:55:04 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.22] [153.96.1.22]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-9751370; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:55:03 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7EDt28s025198; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:55:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7EDt1wf025128 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:55:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7EDt1JL009318; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:55:01 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:55:01 +0200 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:52:02 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> To: jek3@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2007 13:55:01.0718 (UTC) FILETIME=[B5953760:01C7DE7A] Status: RO Content-Length: 1058 Joseph Kowalski wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Don Cragun wrote: > > > > > >> 6. Resources and Schedule > >> 6.4. Steering Committee requested information > >> 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: > >> ON > >> 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack > >> > > > > This cannot be a fasttrack, please make a halfway complete proposal first! > > > > Jörg > > > The project gets to propose the type of review. This program > choose to propose "fast-track". > > The ARC can derail that case. That makes the a full case. The case is inclomplete as it does not include the description for the archive format extensions that will be used. For this reason, it cannot be handles at all. It is just incomplete. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Tue Aug 14 07:12:22 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7EECLD4014202 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:12:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7EE9rXc023477; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 22:09:54 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMR00105OOH7O00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:09:53 -0600 (MDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.5]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMR00DO6OOEYN80@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:09:51 -0600 (MDT) Received: from d1-emea-09.sun.com (d1-emea-09.sun.com [192.18.2.119]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7EE9nWx027158; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:09:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-09.sun.com by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMR00I01OK0OW00@d1-emea-09.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:09:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.136] by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMR00ACUOOCTI00@d1-emea-09.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:09:48 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:09:48 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jek3@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C1B7AC.2060905@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070703) Status: RO Content-Length: 1118 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Joseph Kowalski wrote: > >> Joerg Schilling wrote: >>> Don Cragun wrote: >>> >>> >>>> 6. Resources and Schedule >>>> 6.4. Steering Committee requested information >>>> 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: >>>> ON >>>> 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack >>>> >>> This cannot be a fasttrack, please make a halfway complete proposal first! >>> >>> Jörg >>> >> The project gets to propose the type of review. This program >> choose to propose "fast-track". >> >> The ARC can derail that case. That makes the a full case. > > The case is inclomplete as it does not include the description for the archive > format extensions that will be used. For this reason, it cannot be handles at > all. It is just incomplete. This case does not introduce an archive format or any extensions it just uses the one that already exists. This case best I can tell just provides -/ that stores/retrieves attributes in exactly the same format as -@ already does. The only real distinction between -@ and -/ is which attributes. -- Darren J Moffat From gww@eng.sun.com Tue Aug 14 07:56:17 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7EEuG31015290 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:56:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7EEqoOQ001843; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:53:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMR00303QPMQA00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:53:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from engmail3mpk.sfbay.Sun.COM ([129.146.11.26]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMR00DCWQPLYRA0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:53:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by engmail3mpk.sfbay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7EEriJP023384; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:53:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l7EEpYDO001915; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id l7EEpY57001914; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:51:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de, Darren.Moffat@sun.com Cc: jek3@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <200708141451.l7EEpY57001914@marduk.eng.sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-Sun-Charset: ISO-8859-1 X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 875 > >>> This cannot be a fasttrack, please make a halfway complete proposal first! > >>> > >>> Jörg > >>> > >> The project gets to propose the type of review. This program > >> choose to propose "fast-track". > >> > >> The ARC can derail that case. That makes the a full case. > > > > The case is inclomplete as it does not include the description for the archive > > format extensions that will be used. For this reason, it cannot be handles at > > all. It is just incomplete. > > This case does not introduce an archive format or any extensions it just > uses the one that already exists. This case best I can tell just > provides -/ that stores/retrieves attributes in exactly the same format > as -@ already does. The only real distinction between -@ and -/ is > which attributes. (Sorry) Duhhhh, just like Don said last week and I said yesterday!! Gary.. From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Tue Aug 14 10:33:48 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7EHXmta019962 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 10:33:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7EHVL3Z016812; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 10:31:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMR00C01Y085Z00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 11:31:21 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMR008G2Y07N540@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 11:31:19 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay21.sun.com (relay21.sun.com [192.12.251.14] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7EHVIEr009027; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:31:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms24es.sun.com ([150.143.232.74] [150.143.232.74]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-400978; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:31:18 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms21bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms21bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.10]) by mms24es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-960872; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:31:18 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay25.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-6076515; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 17:31:17 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7EHVGc4013309; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:31:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7EHVFAZ013250 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:31:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7EHV0We023241; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:31:15 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:31:10 +0200 Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 19:28:10 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> To: jek3@Sun.COM, gww@eng.sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c1e62a./eopQIzPE9l/Jl9j%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2007 17:31:10.0113 (UTC) FILETIME=[E7594110:01C7DE98] Status: RO Content-Length: 1631 Gary Winiger wrote: > > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > Keep in mind that it is not acceptable to have archive enhancements that are not > > > compatible with already existing archive format enhancements from other > > > programs. See: > > > > > > http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/star/star.4.html > > > > > Why is this unacceptable? > > > > This becomes close to a requirement for appropriate programs, which > > are in Solaris. For programs sitting in some arbitrary server or ~home > > its nothing more than a nice thing for significant programs, for some > > very arbitrary definition of "significant". Since this is nothing more > > than a "nice thing", one should be "nice" rather than yelling. > > > Unless I'm off base, I think there's a misunderstanding by > the question of what's happening. Various archive programs > have been able to archive a files attribute files since attribute > files were introduced. The -/ option selects those attribute files > that include system attributes. It is analgous to -@ in that > respect. As I did mention already this is only abut what but not about _how_ to to it. As this is not the command "ls", the _how_ is not obvious but needs to introduce an archive format extension. This archive format extension is missing from the ARC case. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From jek3@sun.com Tue Aug 14 13:06:00 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7EK5xwD023841 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7EK3R79021007; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:03:30 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMS00G0551SL400@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:03:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com ([129.146.68.130]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMS00BIG51SAK50@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:03:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.150.12.124] (vpn-129-150-12-124.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.12.124]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7EK3MEw174090; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:03:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 10:03:16 -1000 From: Joseph Kowalski Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060911) Status: RO Content-Length: 510 Dropping the other thread (full-case/wrong project)... Not worth it. Joerg Schilling wrote: > The case is inclomplete as it does not include the description for the archive > format extensions that will be used. For this reason, it cannot be handles at > all. It is just incomplete. > > Jörg > OK. Without commenting on the specifics, "incomplete" is a *very* valid concern. It wasn't clear to me if Don agreed with your assesment. This discussion should continue on this alias. - cheers, - jek3 From dwc@spartan.eng.sun.com Tue Aug 14 13:43:50 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7EKhoPa024386 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:43:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7EKfAox020255; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:41:22 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMS00I0B6SVFV00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:41:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.146.226.64]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMS00B5F6SVAA80@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:41:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l7EKfIxW005371; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:41:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dwc@localhost) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/Submit) id l7EKfIJW005370; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:41:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:41:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Cragun Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de, jek3@sun.com Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <200708142041.l7EKfIJW005370@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 1116 >Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 10:03:16 -1000 >From: Joseph Kowalski > >Dropping the other thread (full-case/wrong project)... Not worth it. > >Joerg Schilling wrote: >> The case is inclomplete as it does not include the description for the archive >> format extensions that will be used. For this reason, it cannot be handles at >> all. It is just incomplete. >> >> Jörg >> >OK. Without commenting on the specifics, "incomplete" is a *very* valid >concern. > >It wasn't clear to me if Don agreed with your assesment. This >discussion should continue >on this alias. Joe, Once more, for the record, as stated in my email on Saturday: "No archive format changes are being proposed by this case. The archive format introduced by the extended attributes case (PSARC/1999/209) was integrated into the cpio and tar sources over six years ago (07/29/2001). The new headers introduced at that time are also used for the extended system attributes for which this case adds support." This case is complete; it introduces no new archive format extensions. - Don > >- cheers, > >- jek3 From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 02:23:46 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7F9Nkmh006647 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:23:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7F9LJTo024903; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:21:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00A095ZIYC00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT006DG5ZIQX60@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (ip123.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.123]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7F9LHRp008545; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:21:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp14es.sun.com ([160.41.209.24] [160.41.209.24]) by relay13i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-654779; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:21:17 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay16i.sun.com (relay16i.sun.com [129.179.4.126]) by mmp14es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3251040; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:21:16 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2796327; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:21:16 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7F9LFNp015580; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:21:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7F9LBOB015365 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:21:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7F9LA14002921; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:21:11 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:21:10 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:18:10 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> To: jek3@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 09:21:10.0769 (UTC) FILETIME=[9E631E10:01C7DF1D] Status: RO Content-Length: 3041 Joseph Kowalski wrote: > > Dropping the other thread (full-case/wrong project)... Not worth it. > > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > The case is inclomplete as it does not include the description for the archive > > format extensions that will be used. For this reason, it cannot be handles at > > all. It is just incomplete. > > > > Jörg > > > OK. Without commenting on the specifics, "incomplete" is a *very* valid > concern. > > It wasn't clear to me if Don agreed with your assesment. This > discussion should continue > on this alias. Joseph, I have two concerns: 1) Don did get the approval for adding -/ to ls(1) only because he did promise not to plan to do the same for tar(1). I did mention in June (when Don started hist first attempt to introduce this incompatible option) that star(1), spax(1) and scpio(1) already use -/ for a porpose that is definitely better related to the character '/'. Just to make clear that the -/ option is a well known old option, -/ has been intoduced 13 years ago in 1994. See: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/star/star.1.html -/ is the third Option in the "OPTIONS" section. Now Don definitely plans to introduce option incompatibility to tar(1), cpio(1) and pax(1). If we like to take Don for serious and if Don like to keep his credibility, he should withdraw this proposal and make a new one that is not in conflict with star(1), scpio(1) and spax(1). Note that the pax command that Sun is currently using is closed source and if Sun is really pushing OpenSource, Sun should replace the current pax(1) binary by a link to the OpenSource (CDDL) star(1) command. I would even recommend to rethinkg _all_ other commands that did introduce -/ recently and replace -/ by something more apropriate to allow a unique CLI interface. 2) The archive format for the planned feature is not documented. Even if Don is correct and this feature would not introduce a new archive format extension, we need a description on how the underlying feature is implemented in the filesystem, using an already existing machanism. The only way to implement file flags that would not extend the archive file format, would be to define a specific behavior/meaning for files and/or file content iside the attribute directory for such a file. I do not remember to see such a descrition before and such a description would be needed to approve this case. I hope that the PSARC team acts in a way that makes it credible. This needs to reject attempts to slip in decisions by cutting a big change into a series of small changes, just to create the attempt that there is no plan for a larger change that would need more in depth discussions. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Wed Aug 15 03:34:17 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FAYHrK007406 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 03:34:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FAVbPt033552; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:31:38 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT004059919B00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 03:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.5]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT003K7990PK90@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 03:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d1-emea-09.sun.com (d1-emea-09.sun.com [192.18.2.119]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FAVl2S011602; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:31:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-09.sun.com by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMT00C01979CO00@d1-emea-09.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:31:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.136] by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMT00A6K98ZTI20@d1-emea-09.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:31:47 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:31:47 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jek3@sun.com, PSARC-EXT@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C2D613.6000507@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070703) Status: RO Content-Length: 975 star is NOT relevant to the review of this case. Until star is ARC approved AND INTEGRATED into OpenSolaris it really isn't relevant what star does or doesn't do. If you want star to be relevant then complete an ARC review and get it integrated don't expect someone at Sun to do this for you, if you want it to happen so that it becomes the archiver or reference for all of OpenSolaris then that is the way forward. Now having said that there is a "bigger picture" aspect here and that I think is what you are really attempting to address. The "bigger picture" here is that OpenSolaris needs a better set or archivers, ones that support the most recent standards would be good. Maybe the way to address that is to use star, but only if star can be 100% compatible with the archives that the existing tools have already created and be compatible with the CLI as well. The way to determine this is to run star through as an ARC proposal. -- Darren J Moffat From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 04:15:22 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FBFLNJ008376 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:15:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FBCfPw000546; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:12:51 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00809B5DKD00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:12:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.98.34]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00337B5DPQB0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:12:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FBACFO010609; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:12:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms48es.sun.com ([160.41.221.231] [160.41.221.231]) by relay42i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1056410; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:12:49 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay44i.sun.com ([192.5.209.118] [192.5.209.118]) by mms48es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1092189; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:12:48 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.24] [153.96.1.24]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-10362753; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:12:47 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FBCl3k008637; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:12:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FBCkXI008624 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:12:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FBCjJW010456; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:12:46 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:12:46 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:09:45 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> To: jek3@sun.com, gww@eng.sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c2def9.oEHadddS04VZBTlK%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 11:12:46.0300 (UTC) FILETIME=[353C11C0:01C7DF2D] Status: RO Content-Length: 1594 Gary Winiger wrote: > > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > Keep in mind that it is not acceptable to have archive enhancements that are not > > > compatible with already existing archive format enhancements from other > > > programs. See: > > > > > > http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/star/star.4.html > > > > > Why is this unacceptable? > > > > This becomes close to a requirement for appropriate programs, which > > are in Solaris. For programs sitting in some arbitrary server or ~home > > its nothing more than a nice thing for significant programs, for some > > very arbitrary definition of "significant". Since this is nothing more > > than a "nice thing", one should be "nice" rather than yelling. > > > Unless I'm off base, I think there's a misunderstanding by > the question of what's happening. Various archive programs > have been able to archive a files attribute files since attribute > files were introduced. The -/ option selects those attribute files > that include system attributes. It is analgous to -@ in that > respect. Before Don did get the approval to introduce -/ for ls(1) he promised _not_ to do the same for tar(1). Let us follow him and deny the approval for this case that would definitely introduce CLI incompatibilities. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM Wed Aug 15 04:24:30 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FBOTrX008426 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FBM1Va007898; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:22:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT0080RBKPAB00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 05:22:01 -0600 (MDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.5]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT000UNBKOBD70@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 05:22:01 -0600 (MDT) Received: from d1-emea-10.sun.com (d1-emea-10.sun.com [192.18.2.120]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FBLxRw015732; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:21:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-10.sun.com by d1-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMT00F01BHEEK00@d1-emea-10.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:21:59 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.136] by d1-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMT00GBWBKN5810@d1-emea-10.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:21:59 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:21:59 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c2def9.oEHadddS04VZBTlK%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jek3@Sun.COM, gww@eng.sun.com, PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46C2E1D7.5080609@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> <46c2def9.oEHadddS04VZBTlK%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070703) Status: RO Content-Length: 1790 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Gary Winiger wrote: > >>> Joerg Schilling wrote: >>>> Keep in mind that it is not acceptable to have archive enhancements that are not >>>> compatible with already existing archive format enhancements from other >>>> programs. See: >>>> >>>> http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/man/star/star.4.html >>>> >>> Why is this unacceptable? >>> >>> This becomes close to a requirement for appropriate programs, which >>> are in Solaris. For programs sitting in some arbitrary server or ~home >>> its nothing more than a nice thing for significant programs, for some >>> very arbitrary definition of "significant". Since this is nothing more >>> than a "nice thing", one should be "nice" rather than yelling. >> >> Unless I'm off base, I think there's a misunderstanding by >> the question of what's happening. Various archive programs >> have been able to archive a files attribute files since attribute >> files were introduced. The -/ option selects those attribute files >> that include system attributes. It is analgous to -@ in that >> respect. > > Before Don did get the approval to introduce -/ for ls(1) he promised _not_ > to do the same for tar(1). Don was the fast-track sponsor for the case (2007/394) NOT the project team representative (Basabi was in that case) Same in this case, Don is just the person sponsoring the ARC case NOT the project team representative (Cynthia is for this one). > Let us follow him and deny the approval for this case that would definitely > introduce CLI incompatibilities. Incompatibility with what existing already integrated or ARC approved OpenSolaris command ? Incompatible with star is use of -/ does not count it is not ARC approved or in OpenSolaris. -- Darren J Moffat From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed Aug 15 04:41:21 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FBfKRr008505 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FBcV1E009665; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:38:50 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00J05CCN0J00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:38:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00IEMCCLCW00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7FBVIn3001815; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:31:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7FBVDbS001812; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:31:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:31:12 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 3430 Joerg Schilling writes: > 1) Don did get the approval for adding -/ to ls(1) only because he did > promise not to plan to do the same for tar(1). I've looked over PSARC 2007/394 (which added '-/' to ls), and I can't find any such promise. Can you provide a citation? > If we like to take Don for serious and if Don like to keep his > credibility, he should withdraw this proposal and make a new one that Wow. That's offensive. First of all, this isn't Don's proposal. The submitter (author) is Cynthia Eastham. Don is the sponsor. We do like to take Don "for serious," because he's a long-time PSARC intern and an expert in standards compliance, but withdrawing the case needs the submitter's consent as well. Secondly, one of our goals here is to avoid gratuitous differences among OpenSolaris interfaces. That means that if we can allocate the same option letter for ls(1), tar(1), and cp(1) for the same purpose, then we'll do so. This case is following multiple other cases (2007/394, 2007/410, 2007/432) that have incrementally added -/ and -% to various common utilities. Thus, this one is in fact preserving integrity among those commands by using the same option for the same purpose. Finally, I don't see how we're under any obligation to avoid all possible conflicts with non-OpenSolaris command variants. Sure, it'd be nice if we could do so, and better still with a survey of more than just the "shilly" commands (avoiding GNU conflicts seems more important to me), but strict avoidance seems unlikely to happen. If you have a concrete proposal for how these options can be added in a coherent way, then please do provide it. Otherwise, "no" isn't a useful answer. > is not in conflict with star(1), scpio(1) and spax(1). Note that > the pax command that Sun is currently using is closed source and if > Sun is really pushing OpenSource, Sun should replace the current > pax(1) binary by a link to the OpenSource (CDDL) star(1) command. That seems both wrong and off-topic. We're discussing changes to the OpenSolaris cpio(1), pax(1), and tar(1) commands, not replacement of those commands or the licenses or availability of the source. Those issues aren't part of architectural review. Perhaps opensolaris-discuss might be a better venue. > I would even recommend to rethinkg _all_ other commands that did > introduce -/ recently and replace -/ by something more apropriate > to allow a unique CLI interface. If any rethinking is done, I'd _insist_ that they all be done together. This piecemeal approach has been confusing at best, and consistency is highly desirable. That feedback has already been given to the project team, during ARC business when we discussed 2007/432. As this is expected to be the last of these cases, it needn't be repeated here, but I'll do so anyway: one case would have been better. > 2) The archive format for the planned feature is not documented. There's no new archive format here. Adding an option that uses an existing format doesn't sound like a reason to force documentation of what's already there. But if the project team could supply that documentation, that might be helpful to close the loop on 1999/209. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed Aug 15 04:53:34 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FBrXvu008599 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:53:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FBp00b023158; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:51:03 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00A0HCX12E00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 05:51:01 -0600 (MDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT0005HCX0BB90@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 05:51:00 -0600 (MDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7FBhYB2001846; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:43:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7FBhYHZ001843; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:43:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:43:34 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c2def9.oEHadddS04VZBTlK%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <18114.59110.212754.689338@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> <46c2def9.oEHadddS04VZBTlK%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 1372 Joerg Schilling writes: > Let us follow him and deny the approval for this case that would definitely > introduce CLI incompatibilities. Technically, it's not possible for the ARC to deny approval for a fast-track. Denials require a written opinion, and fast-tracks (by definition) don't have written opinions. The options are: - Timer expires and case is automatically approved. - Someone asks for more time to discuss an issue, and the timer is extended. - The case is marked "waiting need spec" and the timer is stopped because of some missing (and required) information. - The case is derailed by a full member for full review. I'd suggest convincing the project team, sponsor, or one of the members that there's a serious problem here. I would also suggest that questioning whether those folks are acting in good faith (breaking promises) or whether Sun itself is committed to open source or whether the participants in the discussion are "serious" or "credible" is not a good way to convince others. I'm no interpersonal relations expert, but I'd expect such things to result in disagreement rather than consensus. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed Aug 15 04:54:34 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FBsYOm008949 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FBq6eD014403; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:52:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00C05CYUKY00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:52:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT0034GCYTS4C0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 04:52:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7FBicdZ001856; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:44:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7FBicub001853; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:44:38 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:44:38 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C2E1D7.5080609@Sun.COM> To: Darren J Moffat Cc: Joerg Schilling , jek3@Sun.COM, gww@eng.sun.com, PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <18114.59174.345898.6403@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> <46c2def9.oEHadddS04VZBTlK%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C2E1D7.5080609@Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 508 Darren J Moffat writes: > Incompatibility with what existing already integrated or ARC approved > OpenSolaris command ? > > Incompatible with star is use of -/ does not count it is not ARC > approved or in OpenSolaris. Actually, it was. See 2004/480. It just hasn't integrated. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 07:43:43 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FEhgRD010890 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:43:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FEenJR015674; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:41:10 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00K03KSI4O00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:41:06 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.24]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00GCGKSGNJ40@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:41:05 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay23.sun.com (relay23.sun.com [192.12.251.54] (may be forged)) by sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FEf34f000902; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:41:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms24es.sun.com ([150.143.232.74] [150.143.232.74]) by relay23.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-481125; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:41:00 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms21bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms21bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.10]) by mms24es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-33822; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:41:00 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.24] [153.96.1.24]) by relay25.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-7194479; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:40:59 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FEexYR024358; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:40:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FEewHi024353 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:40:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FEewVm024743; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:40:58 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:40:57 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:37:57 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C2D613.6000507@Sun.COM> To: Darren.Moffat@sun.com Cc: PSARC-EXT@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c30fc5.QZNLTY4We1P3w1X6%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C2D613.6000507@Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 14:40:57.0743 (UTC) FILETIME=[4AB701F0:01C7DF4A] Status: RO Content-Length: 2440 Darren J Moffat wrote: > star is NOT relevant to the review of this case. Until star is ARC > approved AND INTEGRATED into OpenSolaris it really isn't relevant what > star does or doesn't do. Star _is_ ARC approved (2004/480) As you write ARC approved AND INTEGRATED, this only seems to make sense to me in case there is a succient number of people inside Sun that is going to boycot the star integration. Is this what you like to say or is there a miss understanding? I thought that OpenSolaris is on the way of becoming really open. This implies that we need to replace CS parts and the only way I see to achieve this for pax(1) (in a way that gives sufficient Solaris specific support) is to replace /usr/bin/pax by a hard link to /usr/bin/star (the latter being under CDDL). In order to find the right way for OpenSolaris, there is a need for global planning that includes OSS programs that are already approved for integration instead of doing short sighted changes. As this FastTrack case obviously introduces a lot of problems, we need to derail it and to start a discussion for a better solution that does not introduce incompatibilities. > If you want star to be relevant then complete an ARC review and get it > integrated don't expect someone at Sun to do this for you, if you want > it to happen so that it becomes the archiver or reference for all of > OpenSolaris then that is the way forward. > > Now having said that there is a "bigger picture" aspect here and that I > think is what you are really attempting to address. The "bigger > picture" here is that OpenSolaris needs a better set or archivers, ones > that support the most recent standards would be good. Maybe the way to > address that is to use star, but only if star can be 100% compatible > with the archives that the existing tools have already created and be > compatible with the CLI as well. The way to determine this is to run > star through as an ARC proposal. We did discuss this ad nauseam... this possibility exists and there is already an idea on how to achieve this in an intermediate way. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 07:50:22 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FEoLJm010957 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:50:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FElkIl026812; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:47:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT0050TL3MC000@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:47:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.43.21]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00ID0L3LCV90@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:47:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay12i.sun.com (ip122.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.122]) by sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FEljQG028379; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:47:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp14es.sun.com ([160.41.209.24] [160.41.209.24]) by relay12i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-653946; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:47:45 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (relay15i.sun.com [129.179.4.125]) by mmp14es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-84075; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:47:44 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.23] [153.96.1.23]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3481716; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:47:44 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FElh3L002939; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:47:43 +0200 (MEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FElgEO002916 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:47:43 +0200 (MEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FElg0Q025214; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:47:42 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:47:42 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:44:41 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C2E1D7.5080609@Sun.COM> To: Darren.Moffat@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, gww@eng.sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c31159.QnKFkr2XZI7G3ZeI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> <46c2def9.oEHadddS04VZBTlK%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C2E1D7.5080609@Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 14:47:42.0253 (UTC) FILETIME=[3BD255D0:01C7DF4B] Status: RO Content-Length: 1599 Darren J Moffat wrote: > > Before Don did get the approval to introduce -/ for ls(1) he promised _not_ > > to do the same for tar(1). > > Don was the fast-track sponsor for the case (2007/394) NOT the project > team representative (Basabi was in that case) > > Same in this case, Don is just the person sponsoring the ARC case NOT > the project team representative (Cynthia is for this one). It doesn't matter how incompatibility is introduced. We need to prevent it from happening. > > Let us follow him and deny the approval for this case that would definitely > > introduce CLI incompatibilities. > > Incompatibility with what existing already integrated or ARC approved > OpenSolaris command ? > > Incompatible with star is use of -/ does not count it is not ARC > approved or in OpenSolaris. star _is_ ARC case approved (2004/480). I hope it is even possible to roll back the ls(1) ARC case as slitting a big change into several small cases did try to slip in the ARC system. My proposal is the same as I did make in June: - Introduce a long option for the intended purpose. - If the getopt() in Solaris libc is unable to handle long-only options, chose an otherwise inapropriate letter (like e.g. '$') for the short options and document this cleanly. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From casper@holland.sun.com Wed Aug 15 07:53:28 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FErSuB011352 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FEp1ec004899; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:51:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00503L90FM00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:51:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com ([129.156.101.192]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00IX3L8ZD390@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:51:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from holland (room101.Holland.Sun.COM [129.159.130.93]) by dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FEosTT018866; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:50:54 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:50:54 +0200 From: Casper.Dik@Sun.COM Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c30fc5.QZNLTY4We1P3w1X6%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: casper@holland.sun.com To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM, PSARC-EXT@Sun.COM, jek3@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <200708151450.l7FEosTT018866@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C2D613.6000507@Sun.COM> <46c30fc5.QZNLTY4We1P3w1X6%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 587 >As you write ARC approved AND INTEGRATED, this only seems to make sense to me >in case there is a succient number of people inside Sun that is going >to boycot the star integration. Is this what you like to say or is there >a miss understanding? Since noone is working on star integration, you can hardly blame people for making forward progress in their part of the world. You won't wait for a train which isn't scheduled to arrive. Star is not alone: there are probably hundreds of ARC cases approved but never implemented; sometimes superceded and many times abandoned. Casper From Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM Wed Aug 15 08:02:11 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FF2AMU012163 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:02:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FExfQD002094; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:59:41 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00507LNHQ300@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:59:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.6]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00IDQLNGCVA0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 07:59:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d1-emea-09.sun.com ([192.18.2.119]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FExdvC024058; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:59:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-09.sun.com by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMT00F01LLOPK00@d1-emea-09.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:59:39 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.136] by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMT00DQ4LNF9800@d1-emea-09.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:59:39 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:59:39 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c30fc5.QZNLTY4We1P3w1X6%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM To: Joerg Schilling Cc: PSARC-EXT@Sun.COM, jek3@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46C314DB.2080805@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C2D613.6000507@Sun.COM> <46c30fc5.QZNLTY4We1P3w1X6%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070703) Status: RO Content-Length: 1669 Joerg Schilling wrote: > As you write ARC approved AND INTEGRATED, this only seems to make sense to me > in case there is a succient number of people inside Sun that is going > to boycot the star integration. Is this what you like to say or is there > a miss understanding? I am certainly not suggesting that anyone is doing anything like that at all. > I thought that OpenSolaris is on the way of becoming really open. This implies > that we need to replace CS parts and the only way I see to achieve this for > pax(1) (in a way that gives sufficient Solaris specific support) is to replace > /usr/bin/pax by a hard link to /usr/bin/star (the latter being under CDDL). Then find and ARC sponsor and propose such a case. The previous case 2004/480 did not approve star as a replacement for tar but instead has approval to ship star in /usr/sfw. > As this FastTrack case obviously introduces a lot of problems, we need to > derail it and to start a discussion for a better solution that does not > introduce incompatibilities. I'm not going to derail it because I don't see anything wrong with it. It provides good and needed incremental improvement, consistency with the recently approved cases for the other utilities and it doesn't stop a future integration of star (it does leave an issue on the table for such a future case on how to deal with the star specific -/ option but that is a topic for the future case should it ever happen). > We did discuss this ad nauseam... this possibility exists and there is already > an idea on how to achieve this in an intermediate way. Then where is the ARC case proposal for it ? -- Darren J Moffat From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 08:17:34 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FFHYlr012324 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:17:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FFF4DW029078; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:15:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT0051FMD64700@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:15:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.98.34]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00IXJMD4V590@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:15:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay21.sun.com (relay21.sun.com [192.12.251.14] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FFF4Mi018624; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:15:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms24es.sun.com ([150.143.232.74] [150.143.232.74]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-485096; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:15:04 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.90]) by mms24es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-114590; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:15:03 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.23] [153.96.1.23]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-10780064; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:15:03 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFF1Kr012957; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:15:02 +0200 (MEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFEvnG012742 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:15:00 +0200 (MEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FFErX9027197; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:14:53 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:14:53 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:11:52 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: james.d.carlson@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 15:14:53.0201 (UTC) FILETIME=[07F14010:01C7DF4F] Status: RO Content-Length: 5470 James Carlson wrote: > Joerg Schilling writes: > > 1) Don did get the approval for adding -/ to ls(1) only because he did > > promise not to plan to do the same for tar(1). > > I've looked over PSARC 2007/394 (which added '-/' to ls), and I can't > find any such promise. Can you provide a citation? This is what I have in mind. I am not sure what Don relly mailed. The discussion was about that clashes cannot be avoided, but this was done under completely different constraints as it would be if tar(1) has to be included in the list of commands that are affected. If someone writes that there is no clash because we are not talking abut tar(1), this claim is obviously no longer true and we even need to unroll the ls(1) case again. > First of all, this isn't Don's proposal. The submitter (author) is > Cynthia Eastham. Don is the sponsor. We do like to take Don "for > serious," because he's a long-time PSARC intern and an expert in > standards compliance, but withdrawing the case needs the submitter's > consent as well. This is not personal! I am trying to point to a serious CLI compatibility problem that will be introduced in case that tar(1), cpio(1) and/or pax(1) add a -/ option as these progams already include such an option if you use the versions that come with the star package. > Secondly, one of our goals here is to avoid gratuitous differences > among OpenSolaris interfaces. That means that if we can allocate the > same option letter for ls(1), tar(1), and cp(1) for the same purpose, > then we'll do so. This case is following multiple other cases > (2007/394, 2007/410, 2007/432) that have incrementally added -/ and -% > to various common utilities. Thus, this one is in fact preserving > integrity among those commands by using the same option for the same > purpose. We _cannot_ allocate -/ for tar(1), cpio(1) and/or pax(1). So you also seem to propose that we need to start again the discussion for ls(1). > Finally, I don't see how we're under any obligation to avoid all > possible conflicts with non-OpenSolaris command variants. Sure, it'd > be nice if we could do so, and better still with a survey of more than > just the "shilly" commands (avoiding GNU conflicts seems more > important to me), but strict avoidance seems unlikely to happen. tar(1) should be replaced by star in order to get a modern tar implementaion on Solaris that offers the features that people like to see. pax(1) _needs_ to be replaced because the current version is Close Source. As the integration of star has already been approved (case 2004/480) and as star is under CDDL, it is obvious to replace the current /usr/bin/pax by a link to star. > If you have a concrete proposal for how these options can be added in I did already make a proposal for a better way to deal with the problem in June. This was for the first arc case for ls(1). > > is not in conflict with star(1), scpio(1) and spax(1). Note that > > the pax command that Sun is currently using is closed source and if > > Sun is really pushing OpenSource, Sun should replace the current > > pax(1) binary by a link to the OpenSource (CDDL) star(1) command. > > That seems both wrong and off-topic. We're discussing changes to the > OpenSolaris cpio(1), pax(1), and tar(1) commands, not replacement of > those commands or the licenses or availability of the source. I understand that ARC cases on Solaris are in order to grant long term interface stability on Solaris. The current arc case looks like an unplanned action similar to what I only know with Linux. I was in hope that on Solaris there is a long term planning for interfaces. Please do not try to propose to iplement "cheap" solutions that just benefit the lazy programmer but harm the long term integrity of OpenSolaris. > > I would even recommend to rethinkg _all_ other commands that did > > introduce -/ recently and replace -/ by something more apropriate > > to allow a unique CLI interface. > > If any rethinking is done, I'd _insist_ that they all be done > together. This piecemeal approach has been confusing at best, and > consistency is highly desirable. Thank you for supporting me! I don't like this too and I would loke to see a complete arc case that includes all aspects of the global problem and discusses possible solutions. > That feedback has already been given to the project team, during ARC > business when we discussed 2007/432. As this is expected to be the > last of these cases, it needn't be repeated here, but I'll do so > anyway: one case would have been better. > > > 2) The archive format for the planned feature is not documented. > > There's no new archive format here. Adding an option that uses an > existing format doesn't sound like a reason to force documentation of > what's already there. > > But if the project team could supply that documentation, that might be > helpful to close the loop on 1999/209. It is most unlikely that a case from 1999 includes support for file flags. If file flags are introduced by adding special interpretations on the extended attribute files, this needs to be documented. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 08:20:30 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FFKTVt012346 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:20:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FFHqKa002344; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:17:56 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT0060FMHTLC00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:17:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00IE1MHSCSB0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:17:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FETAR2025129; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:17:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms49es.sun.com ([160.41.221.233] [160.41.221.233]) by relay43i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1088381; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:17:52 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay41i.sun.com ([192.5.209.70] [192.5.209.70]) by mms49es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1110449; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:17:52 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1286347; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:17:51 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFHove006386; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:17:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFHo0L006316 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:17:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FFHdfd027510; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:17:39 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:17:39 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:14:38 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18114.59110.212754.689338@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: james.d.carlson@Sun.COM Cc: PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c3185e.CDDJcGdRmEKhX1Fk%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708140132.l7E1WJCd001258@marduk.eng.sun.com> <46c2def9.oEHadddS04VZBTlK%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.59110.212754.689338@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 15:17:39.0159 (UTC) FILETIME=[6ADC6E70:01C7DF4F] Status: RO Content-Length: 1538 James Carlson wrote: > Joerg Schilling writes: > > Let us follow him and deny the approval for this case that would definitely > > introduce CLI incompatibilities. > > Technically, it's not possible for the ARC to deny approval for a > fast-track. Denials require a written opinion, and fast-tracks (by > definition) don't have written opinions. > > The options are: > > - Timer expires and case is automatically approved. > > - Someone asks for more time to discuss an issue, and the timer is > extended. > > - The case is marked "waiting need spec" and the timer is stopped > because of some missing (and required) information. > > - The case is derailed by a full member for full review. > > I'd suggest convincing the project team, sponsor, or one of the > members that there's a serious problem here. > > I would also suggest that questioning whether those folks are acting > in good faith (breaking promises) or whether Sun itself is committed > to open source or whether the participants in the discussion are This seems to match my wishes. I believe that the case cannot be handled as a fast track and needs futher discussion in order to find a sulution that is globally acceptable. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 08:25:18 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FFPHdZ012384 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FFMXfn004666; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:22:43 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00M05MPTD300@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:22:41 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00GZZMPRNI90@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:22:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay18i.sun.com (ip128.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.128]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FFEVdQ020584; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:22:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp14es.sun.com ([160.41.209.24] [160.41.209.24]) by relay18i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-760667; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:22:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay14i.sun.com (relay14i.sun.com [129.179.4.124]) by mmp14es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-109331; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:22:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.24] [153.96.1.24]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3506146; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:22:38 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFMbCw020189; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:22:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFMaYp020173 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:22:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FFMah5027914; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:22:36 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:22:36 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:19:35 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708151450.l7FEosTT018866@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> To: Casper.Dik@Sun.COM Cc: PSARC-EXT@Sun.COM, jek3@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c31987.tkqrsCiyKkbG4gsq%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C2D613.6000507@Sun.COM> <46c30fc5.QZNLTY4We1P3w1X6%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708151450.l7FEosTT018866@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 15:22:36.0713 (UTC) FILETIME=[1C379190:01C7DF50] Status: RO Content-Length: 855 Casper.Dik@Sun.COM wrote: > > >As you write ARC approved AND INTEGRATED, this only seems to make sense to me > >in case there is a succient number of people inside Sun that is going > >to boycot the star integration. Is this what you like to say or is there > >a miss understanding? > > Since noone is working on star integration, you can hardly blame > people for making forward progress in their part of the world. > You won't wait for a train which isn't scheduled to arrive. Please do not spread wrong claims! Star integration is beeing worked on. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 08:27:52 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FFRprJ012403 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:27:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FFPEmW005822; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:25:19 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT0060DMU4V600@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.24]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00INYMU3D5C0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:25:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (ip123.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.123]) by sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FFMm5f019956; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:25:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp12es.sun.com ([160.41.209.22] [160.41.209.22]) by relay13i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-666497; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:25:15 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay16i.sun.com (relay16i.sun.com [129.179.4.126]) by mmp12es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2767751; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:25:15 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.22] [153.96.1.22]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2838068; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:25:14 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFPDAo008807; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:25:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFPCSZ008784 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:25:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FFPC4J028116; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:25:12 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:25:12 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:22:11 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C314DB.2080805@Sun.COM> To: Darren.Moffat@sun.com Cc: PSARC-EXT@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c31a23.4ExuRFZfmlzKVm7f%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C2D613.6000507@Sun.COM> <46c30fc5.QZNLTY4We1P3w1X6%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C314DB.2080805@Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 15:25:12.0530 (UTC) FILETIME=[79175B20:01C7DF50] Status: RO Content-Length: 1725 Darren J Moffat wrote: > > I thought that OpenSolaris is on the way of becoming really open. This implies > > that we need to replace CS parts and the only way I see to achieve this for > > pax(1) (in a way that gives sufficient Solaris specific support) is to replace > > /usr/bin/pax by a hard link to /usr/bin/star (the latter being under CDDL). > > Then find and ARC sponsor and propose such a case. The previous case > 2004/480 did not approve star as a replacement for tar but instead has > approval to ship star in /usr/sfw. It did not approve it but it suggests it. At the time when this case was handled, there was no need to replace /usr/bin/pax by opensource. This is diffrent now. > > As this FastTrack case obviously introduces a lot of problems, we need to > > derail it and to start a discussion for a better solution that does not > > introduce incompatibilities. > > I'm not going to derail it because I don't see anything wrong with it. > It provides good and needed incremental improvement, consistency with > the recently approved cases for the other utilities and it doesn't stop > a future integration of star (it does leave an issue on the table for > such a future case on how to deal with the star specific -/ option but > that is a topic for the future case should it ever happen). Sorry, it tries to introduce unneeded inconsisty in the list of archivers. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From casper@holland.sun.com Wed Aug 15 08:27:53 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FFRq00012407 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:27:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FFPF4h014839; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:25:22 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00M33MU6IV00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:25:18 -0600 (MDT) Received: from dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com ([129.156.101.192]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00GXSMU5NJ90@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:25:17 -0600 (MDT) Received: from holland (room101.Holland.Sun.COM [129.159.130.93]) by dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FFPBMk025510; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:25:11 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:25:11 +0200 From: Casper.Dik@sun.com Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c31987.tkqrsCiyKkbG4gsq%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: casper@holland.sun.com To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <200708151525.l7FFPBMk025510@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C2D613.6000507@Sun.COM> <46c30fc5.QZNLTY4We1P3w1X6%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708151450.l7FEosTT018866@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> <46c31987.tkqrsCiyKkbG4gsq%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 590 >Casper.Dik@Sun.COM wrote: > >> >> >As you write ARC approved AND INTEGRATED, this only seems to make sense to me >> >in case there is a succient number of people inside Sun that is going >> >to boycot the star integration. Is this what you like to say or is there >> >a miss understanding? >> >> Since noone is working on star integration, you can hardly blame >> people for making forward progress in their part of the world. >> You won't wait for a train which isn't scheduled to arrive. > >Please do not spread wrong claims! Star integration is beeing worked on. By whom? Casper From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 08:30:00 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FFTx0k012441 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:30:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FFRSVI015711; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:27:29 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00603MXTY600@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:27:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.43.21]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00IQ9MXTCSB0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:27:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74]) by sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FFL5Rb015093; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:27:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms48es.sun.com ([160.41.221.231] [160.41.221.231]) by relay43i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1089148; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:27:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72] [192.5.209.72]) by mms48es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1411531; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:27:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-10528734; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:27:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFRRS8016235; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:27:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FFRQ2C016175 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:27:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FFRQhs028263; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:27:26 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:27:26 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:24:25 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708151525.l7FFPBMk025510@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> To: Casper.Dik@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c31aa9.FiCtWJLudH+2450q%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C2D613.6000507@Sun.COM> <46c30fc5.QZNLTY4We1P3w1X6%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708151450.l7FEosTT018866@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> <46c31987.tkqrsCiyKkbG4gsq%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708151525.l7FFPBMk025510@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 15:27:26.0424 (UTC) FILETIME=[C8E5F580:01C7DF50] Status: RO Content-Length: 995 Casper.Dik@Sun.COM wrote: > > >Casper.Dik@Sun.COM wrote: > > > >> > >> >As you write ARC approved AND INTEGRATED, this only seems to make sense to me > >> >in case there is a succient number of people inside Sun that is going > >> >to boycot the star integration. Is this what you like to say or is there > >> >a miss understanding? > >> > >> Since noone is working on star integration, you can hardly blame > >> people for making forward progress in their part of the world. > >> You won't wait for a train which isn't scheduled to arrive. > > > >Please do not spread wrong claims! Star integration is beeing worked on. > > > By whom? By me and if you are interested, just join the team.... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Wed Aug 15 08:34:39 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FFYdDg012538 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:34:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FFVwH4054930; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:31:59 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00M0DN5NYE00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:32:11 -0600 (MDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.6]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00GY2N5MND90@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:32:10 -0600 (MDT) Received: from d1-emea-09.sun.com ([192.18.2.119]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FFW96Q026403; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:32:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-09.sun.com by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMT00H01N4LF800@d1-emea-09.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:32:09 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.136] by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMT00DVGN5L9800@d1-emea-09.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:32:09 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:32:09 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: James.D.Carlson@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070703) Status: RO Content-Length: 1048 Joerg Schilling wrote: > I am trying to point to a serious CLI compatibility problem that will be > introduced in case that tar(1), cpio(1) and/or pax(1) add a -/ option > as these progams already include such an option if you use the versions that > come with the star package. What about changing star to not use -/ then since it is incompatible with the other cases in this set. > We _cannot_ allocate -/ for tar(1), cpio(1) and/or pax(1). So you also > seem to propose that we need to start again the discussion for ls(1). Who is "we" in this context ? You seem to be the only person objecting to this. It seems to be based only on the fact that you have already choosen to use -/ in star to mean something different. Is that the case ? Lets assume for a moment that you had not already used -/ in star would you be objecting to this user interface then ? When you answer keep in mind that ARC has already approved -/ for other utilities and push aide any issues of license or other non user interface issues. -- Darren J Moffat From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 09:04:21 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FG4Lwb013344 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FG1pBY027349; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:01:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT0080DOJ3G200@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:01:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.43.21]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT00I2KOJ3CVE0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:01:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay11i.sun.com (ip121.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.121]) by sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FG1poF029927; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:01:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp13es.sun.com ([160.41.209.23] [160.41.209.23]) by relay11i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-654698; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:01:50 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay12i.sun.com (relay12i.sun.com [129.179.4.122]) by mmp13es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2801759; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:01:50 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.24] [153.96.1.24]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3555628; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:01:50 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FG1nmR011401; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:01:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FG1kwE011312 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:01:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FFiGKt029275; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:44:16 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:44:16 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:41:15 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> To: Darren.Moffat@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, James.D.Carlson@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 15:44:16.0700 (UTC) FILETIME=[2311D7C0:01C7DF53] Status: RO Content-Length: 1789 Darren J Moffat wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > I am trying to point to a serious CLI compatibility problem that will be > > introduced in case that tar(1), cpio(1) and/or pax(1) add a -/ option > > as these progams already include such an option if you use the versions that > > come with the star package. > > What about changing star to not use -/ then since it is incompatible > with the other cases in this set. No way! Unlike what the current arc case tries to introduce, the -/ option in star is related to it's name. There is also no way to change a 13 year old option. Star grants long term compatibility... > > We _cannot_ allocate -/ for tar(1), cpio(1) and/or pax(1). So you also > > seem to propose that we need to start again the discussion for ls(1). > > Who is "we" in this context ? The OpenSolaris community. > You seem to be the only person objecting to this. It seems to be based > only on the fact that you have already choosen to use -/ in star to mean > something different. Is that the case ? There have been other people who dislike -/ in June. > Lets assume for a moment that you had not already used -/ in star would > you be objecting to this user interface then ? When you answer keep in > mind that ARC has already approved -/ for other utilities and push aide > any issues of license or other non user interface issues. Star is using -/ since 1994 and I am not going to break long term stability/compatibility. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 10:56:05 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FHu4Uv016602 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:56:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FHrRFj018310; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:53:33 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00D1ZTP86T00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT0099HTP58Y50@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:53:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay41i.sun.com ([192.5.209.70]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FHrT5F014087; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:53:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms48es.sun.com ([160.41.221.231] [160.41.221.231]) by relay41i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-143450; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:53:29 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74] [192.5.209.74]) by mms48es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1599662; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:53:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.24] [153.96.1.24]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-10688438; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:53:27 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FHrRKV020869; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:53:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FHrQ1I020854 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:53:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FHrQcx007662; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:53:26 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:53:26 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:50:25 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM Cc: PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 17:53:26.0367 (UTC) FILETIME=[2E3B2EF0:01C7DF65] Status: RO Content-Length: 2288 Let me try to explain why it is important not to ignore incompatibility issues in a changing OpenSolaris. In former times, Solaris was closed source and only Sun decided how to control it. It is obvious that Sun is unable to continue this way for various reasons. Sun started to include OpenSource tools into OpenSolaris and OpenSolaris profits from these additions. Sun now has to decide whether the combination of software originated from Sun and software originated from authors outside Sun, that write free software is a relation at eye-level or whether Sun creates the impression of Sun trying to patronize authors of free software not originated from Sun. On the ksh93 case, we did have a long discussion that was related to long term interface stability and people from Sun did say that long term stability is something that is extremely important for the future of OpenSolaris. Now Sun has the opportunity to prove whether this is just empty words or whether there really is an interest to protect/grant long term stability or whether long term stability is something that is just driven by the mood. If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: -/ Don't strip leading slashes from file names when extracting an archive. Tar archives containing abso- lute pathnames are usually a bad idea. With other tar implementations, they may possibly never be extracted without clobbering existing files. Star for that rea- son, by default strips leading slashes from filenames when in extract mode. As it may be impossible to create an archive where leading slashes have been stripped while retaining correct path names, star does not strip leading slashes in create mode. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed Aug 15 11:16:36 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FIGaMV017288 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:16:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FIDs7c041770; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:13:54 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00E07UNJ6000@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:14:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT009EGUNI9560@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:14:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7FI6dEQ006105; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:06:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7FI6dEU006102; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:06:39 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:06:38 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM, PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 1750 Joerg Schilling writes: > If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), > cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ > option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: This is the point where there's a problem. Your version of tar has no more to do with /usr/bin/tar on OpenSolaris than does GNU tar, AIX tar, or any other implementation. Yes, it'd be possible _in the future_ to create a project that removes the OpenSolaris tar sources (and pax and cpio) and replaces them with links to star. Yes, it might even be helpful to do so. However, that project doesn't currently exist. There is no ARC case that specifies it. There's no plan showing when (or if) it will ever show up. All that we have is a hint in 2004/480 that this "might" be a future project. You're thus asking that we block an otherwise reasonable project on the grounds that maybe -- someday -- there might be a conflict with some other implementation. How far does that extend? How many other people have created their own personal variants of common tools? Should we survey them all, or do just yours alone matter? The issue here isn't with time. Whether you implemented this in 1994 or 1894 wouldn't make a difference here. What does matter is whether the change proposed here makes sense for OpenSolaris itself. I'd like to hear from other ARC members and the original project team on this issue, but I'm leaning towards letting the timer run on this case. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From don.cragun@sun.com Wed Aug 15 12:04:13 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FJ4Drg018613 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:04:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FJ1j5L010407; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:01:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00C0PWUX1A00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:01:45 -0600 (MDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.146.226.64]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT008AMWUV9Y30@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:01:44 -0600 (MDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.64]) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6) with SMTP id l7FJ1hTU007219; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:01:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:01:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Cragun Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Reply-to: Don Cragun Message-id: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.5.5 SunOS 5.9 sun4u sparc Content-type: TEXT/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-MD5: EXkwycVMF0IyrAy3DyEjYg== X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id l7FJ4Drg018613 Status: RO Content-Length: 2023 >Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:50:25 +0200 >From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) > ... ... ... > >If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), >cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ >option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: > > -/ Don't strip leading slashes from file names when > extracting an archive. Tar archives containing abso- > lute pathnames are usually a bad idea. With other tar > implementations, they may possibly never be extracted > without clobbering existing files. Star for that rea- > son, by default strips leading slashes from filenames > when in extract mode. As it may be impossible to > create an archive where leading slashes have been > stripped while retaining correct path names, star does > not strip leading slashes in create mode. Jörg, The only way these four cases (PSARC/2007/459 [cpio, pax, & tar], 423 [compress, cp, pack, uncompress, & unpack], 410 [chmod], and 394 [ls]) create any incompatibility with star is if star is intended to replace cpio, pax, or tar. When you chose to add -/ to star, you guaranteed that star could NEVER replace tar, cpio, or pax in /usr/bin (which supply behavior conforming to SVID3, XPG3, XPG4, SUS, SUSv2, SUSv3 and all of the POSIX standards). Stripping leading slashes from absolute pathnames (by default) as files are extracted from archives violates standards requirements for all of these utilities. Since star cannot replace tar, cpio, or pax without changing the default behavior of star and the meaning of the -/ option as it has been defined by star for the last 13 years, I see no reason why -% and -/ cannot behave as described in these four PSARC cases without causing any incompatibilities to the existing star nor to possible future star enhancements described in PSARC/2004/480. - Don > >Jörg From lists@mcintyreweb.com Wed Aug 15 12:19:11 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FJJAGR018830 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:19:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FJGVp4008503; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 03:16:36 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMT00C05XJNUF00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:16:35 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.24]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMT0083RXJL9X40@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:16:34 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72]) by sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FJGTnR012774; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:16:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms49es.sun.com ([160.41.221.233] [160.41.221.233]) by relay42i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1089234; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:16:29 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72] [192.5.209.72]) by mms49es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1410397; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:16:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from external.mcintyreweb.com ([64.166.3.75] [64.166.3.75]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-10671184; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:16:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from secure.mcintyreweb.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by external.mcintyreweb.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7) with ESMTP id l7FJG721023793; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 139.95.251.10 (SquirrelMail authenticated user hugh) by secure.mcintyreweb.com with HTTP; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:16:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Hugh McIntyre Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: darren.moffat@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, james.d.carlson@sun.com, cynthia.eastham@sun.com Message-id: <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5 Status: RO Content-Length: 1030 I hesitate to get involved in this discussion, but... > If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), > cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ > option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: > > -/ Don't strip leading slashes from file names ... It looks like GNU tar uses a different option for this behaviour: -P, --absolute-paths don't strip leading `/'s from file names Presumably any merge of star into OpenSolaris is going to have to evaluate what to do about incompatible options from Classic Solaris/GNU/star at that point anyway. Perhaps something along the lines of: if (argv[0] == "star") getopts(historical_star_options); else getopts(solaris_compatible_settings); ? Hugh. PS: Solaris tar uses "P" for a different path stripping option, of course: P Suppress the addition of a trailing “/” on directory entries in the archive. From ceastha@jurassic.sfbay.sun.com Wed Aug 15 13:49:04 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FKn3CZ020564 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:49:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FKkWMQ021368; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:46:33 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU00L011PKVI00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com ([129.146.56.36]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU009951PH8YE0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:46:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chaos (chaos.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.112]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with SMTP id l7FKkJuM290029; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:46:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:46:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Cynthia Eastham Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: Your message with ID <200708102331.l7ANViwr001313@sac.sfbay.sun.com> To: Don Cragun Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Reply-to: Cynthia Eastham Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 207 There have been comments saying that this case doesn't describe the format being used. It is described in the archives.h(3HEAD) man page which were provided in the materials directory of this case. Cindy From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 15:20:14 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FMKDm0022742 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:20:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FMHUXf015055; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:17:31 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU003095X63M00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:17:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU00MNH5X6QC40@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:17:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay22.sun.com (relay22.sun.com [192.12.251.34] (may be forged)) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FMHTgG012012; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:17:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms25es.sun.com ([150.143.232.94] [150.143.232.94]) by relay22.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-524328; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:17:29 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.90]) by mms25es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-351946; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:17:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.22] [153.96.1.22]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-11433223; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:17:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FMHQKJ024725; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:17:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FMHQ8M024717 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:17:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FMHPHa018975; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:17:25 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:17:25 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:14:24 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: james.d.carlson@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 22:17:25.0587 (UTC) FILETIME=[0F245A30:01C7DF8A] Status: RO Content-Length: 5472 James Carlson wrote: > Joerg Schilling writes: > > If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), > > cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ > > option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: > > This is the point where there's a problem. The problem is that someone at Sun likes to introduce incompatible bahavor like "... resistance is futile". Solaris needs and adopts OpenSource software from free sources outside of Sun. People inside Sun are interested that these OSS programs fit nicely into OpenSolaris. This looks like OpenSolaris is "interested" on OSS applications that care about the needs of OpenSolaris. Wouldn't it be nice if there is a guesture from people inside Sun like: "We care about your needs and hope that you care about our needs"? Synergy only happens if both parties benefit.... > Your version of tar has no more to do with /usr/bin/tar on OpenSolaris > than does GNU tar, AIX tar, or any other implementation. Sorry, but you seem to be uninformed abut reality! Star has been first written on UNOS in 1992. It has been ported to SunOS in spring 1985. There always was the will to be compatible with /usr/bin/tar on SunOS as far as possible. Sun started to become incompatible in the mid 1990s. Then several years ago, a discussion about a better /etc/rmt from the star package and later one about replacing /usr/bin/tar by star was under way with Dworkin Muller. As star is written in a way that makes it highly configurable and as a result of this discussion, the following programs have been created and added in summer 1993 to the star packet: - suntar.c A program intended to be 100% compatible to Sun tar and to replace /usr/bin/tar - cpio.c A program intended to be 100% compatible to Sun cpio and to replace /usr/bin/cpio - pax.c A program intended to be 100% compatible to POSIX / Sun pax and to replace /usr/bin/pax As star (in contrary to /usr/bin/tar) takes care about security/vulnerability issues that are a result of hand crafted tricks in archives or a result of side effects in archives created by careless users, star by default rejects to unpack files in archives that may result in a compromised system. The files in question that are a security risk and that are blocked by star in extract mode are symlinks and hardlinks that include "/../" in the target path (these files are not extracted) and files with a name that begins with "/" (these files are extracted with the leading "/" striped off. Star also detects and blocks files that are hardlinks to itself and that allow usual tar implementations to be abused to remove files without the caller noticing the problem. This behavior of star is not forbiden by POSIX and gives a significant security improvement. As I do not like to create insecure replacements for /usr/bin/tar, /usar/bin/cpio and /usr/bin/pax, the security precautions from the basic algorithm in star is not disabled by default. Instead, the programs listed above implement additional options -/ and -.. as star does. This was not a problem in 2003 and it was not a problem on June 16th 2004 when PSARC 2004/480 was approved on a PSARC meeting. At the time when the case was approved, the manual pages have been part of the case to the options -/ and -.. have been approved too. After the PSARC case was approved, Dworkin Muller left Sun. This is usually not a problem in a big company like Sun... Now it seems that it was a problem with Sun. THe case was left alone and the integration (definitely planned to take place before Solaris 10 GA) did not happen. The programs tar/cpio/pax have been created to be as compatible as possible to the Sun programs. Now in 2007, it looks to me as if the work that has been done in good faith is not only ignored but worked against. If we do not prevent the introduction of incompatible options into tar/cpio/pax, the plan to give Solaris modern, safe and feature rich replacements for the dusty old implementations will be made impossible just by this planned act. > Yes, it'd be possible _in the future_ to create a project that removes > the OpenSolaris tar sources (and pax and cpio) and replaces them with > links to star. Yes, it might even be helpful to do so. > > However, that project doesn't currently exist. There is no ARC case > that specifies it. There's no plan showing when (or if) it will ever > show up. All that we have is a hint in 2004/480 that this "might" be > a future project. See above and understand what really happened... > You're thus asking that we block an otherwise reasonable project on > the grounds that maybe -- someday -- there might be a conflict with > some other implementation. How far does that extend? How many other > people have created their own personal variants of common tools? > Should we survey them all, or do just yours alone matter? Sorry, I am just requesting to prevent to implement enhancements in an _unrasonable_ way. I am not trying to prevent feature enhancements. This ARC case however tries to prevent future feature enhancements. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Wed Aug 15 15:39:48 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FMdlVB023049 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FMbFN0028376; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:37:16 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU00K016U36H00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:37:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU00G916U2J820@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:37:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FMbEmT024908; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:37:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms49es.sun.com ([160.41.221.233] [160.41.221.233]) by relay43i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1118493; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:37:14 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72] [192.5.209.72]) by mms49es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1599755; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:37:13 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-10767320; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:37:13 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FMb9gF027388; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:37:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7FMb8F7027353 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:37:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7FMb87x019873; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:37:08 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:37:08 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:34:07 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> To: lists@mcintyreweb.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, james.d.carlson@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, darren.moffat@sun.com, cynthia.eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Aug 2007 22:37:08.0360 (UTC) FILETIME=[D0213080:01C7DF8C] Status: RO Content-Length: 3318 "Hugh McIntyre" wrote: > I hesitate to get involved in this discussion, but... > > > If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), > > cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ > > option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: > > > > -/ Don't strip leading slashes from file names ... > > It looks like GNU tar uses a different option for this behaviour: > > -P, --absolute-paths > don't strip leading `/'s from file names If GNU tar did not try to be incompatible to star, star could be compatible to GNU tar. The option -P is used by star since 1986 for allowing to write the last record as partial record. A feature that helps to use star together with QIC tapes. This feature has been added to star before GNU tar esists. It usually makes sense to watch other implementations of similar programs.... As GNU tar is deliberately incompatible to star for a long time, I stopped however to watch GNU tar. > Presumably any merge of star into OpenSolaris is going to have to evaluate > what to do about incompatible options from Classic Solaris/GNU/star at > that point anyway. Perhaps something along the lines of: > > if (argv[0] == "star") > getopts(historical_star_options); > else > getopts(solaris_compatible_settings); > > ? > > Hugh. I recommend you to have a look at the star sources to understand the background. There are special main() programs called suntar.c (may be called as "tar" also"), cpio.c and pax.c. These programs have been created in the attempt to be 100% compatible to the Sun variants of the programs. Now, with this arc case, Sun tries to become incompatible to these programs that have been designed to be compatible. If this ARC case is approved, it looks like an unfriendly act. > PS: Solaris tar uses "P" for a different path stripping option, of course: > > P Suppress the addition of a trailing ?/? on directory > entries in the archive. This option has been introduced more than 10 years after star did introduce -P See above, even for this problem, there is a solution that is working today! It will no longer work in case that this ARC case is approved unchanged. Solaris has become OpenSolaris and OpenSolaris is no longer a Sun only enterprise. This ARC case will show whether people at Sun already understand the fact that OpenSolaris depends on people outside of Sun that will become disappointed in case their interests are ignored. Making the ON repository writable for people outside of Sun is something that taks a long time because many technical things need to be done before. Understanding OpenSolaris and acting the right way is simple and only needs to switch minds. It could be done immediately without problems. Understanding that synergy means benefit for both sides is the first step to create a viable OpenSolaris developer community. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM Wed Aug 15 15:52:15 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FMqFZJ023865 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:52:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FMnhio001910; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:49:46 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU001097EVTT00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:49:43 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU008LN7ES9WD0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:49:41 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FMneIO029000; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:49:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JMU00F017EL1T00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> (original mail from Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:49:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.21] ([76.174.83.55]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMU00AZY7ER7YB0@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:49:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:45:39 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM To: Joerg Schilling Cc: lists@mcintyreweb.com, psarc-ext@Sun.COM, James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <1187217939.909.211.camel@zippy> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 4899 Mostly I've avoided this conversation, but I want to inject two cents here. First, I'm sorry that Joerg feels that his effort is intentionally being stepped on. I really don't think that is what is being done here. There are several different implementations, and they have evolved in incompatible ways.... Second, I do want to point out, that whether or not the repo is open to external commits, the nature of the OpenSolaris project is that no one person has final say... where there are conflicts they will be resolved by committee (that's the "C" in ARC.) So, please don't make the mistake of equating the issue here with Sun's commitment or lack thereof to open source or to community involvement. Joerg, I know you feel very strongly about your implementation, but you are not "the community" in and of yourself. Further, nowhere is it stated that OpenSolaris has as its mission to remain backwards compatible with unbundled 3rd party programs. star counts as one of those. If the direction chosen for tar/pax/cpio is incompatible with star, well, that's unfortunate, but its not a death knell to either star nor to the OpenSolaris project. I think you've done the appropriate thing by raising the issue in the case, but now you need to let the process work it out... and if the process doesn't come to the result you want, you need to accept that and move on. There will be future decisions made by the community, that other people may not agree with. It happens in any large project. So as engineers we learn to voice our opinions, hope for the best, and if a different direction is chosen, deal with it without rancor. Thank you. -- Garrett On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 00:34 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Hugh McIntyre" wrote: > > > I hesitate to get involved in this discussion, but... > > > > > If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), > > > cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ > > > option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: > > > > > > -/ Don't strip leading slashes from file names ... > > > > It looks like GNU tar uses a different option for this behaviour: > > > > -P, --absolute-paths > > don't strip leading `/'s from file names > > If GNU tar did not try to be incompatible to star, star could be compatible to > GNU tar. > > The option -P is used by star since 1986 for allowing to write the last record > as partial record. A feature that helps to use star together with QIC tapes. This > feature has been added to star before GNU tar esists. > > It usually makes sense to watch other implementations of similar programs.... > As GNU tar is deliberately incompatible to star for a long time, I stopped > however to watch GNU tar. > > > > Presumably any merge of star into OpenSolaris is going to have to evaluate > > what to do about incompatible options from Classic Solaris/GNU/star at > > that point anyway. Perhaps something along the lines of: > > > > if (argv[0] == "star") > > getopts(historical_star_options); > > else > > getopts(solaris_compatible_settings); > > > > ? > > > > Hugh. > > I recommend you to have a look at the star sources to understand the background. > > There are special main() programs called suntar.c (may be called as "tar" > also"), cpio.c and pax.c. These programs have been created in the attempt to be > 100% compatible to the Sun variants of the programs. Now, with this arc case, > Sun tries to become incompatible to these programs that have been designed to > be compatible. If this ARC case is approved, it looks like an unfriendly act. > > > > PS: Solaris tar uses "P" for a different path stripping option, of course: > > > > P Suppress the addition of a trailing ?/? on directory > > entries in the archive. > > This option has been introduced more than 10 years after star did introduce -P > > See above, even for this problem, there is a solution that is working today! > It will no longer work in case that this ARC case is approved unchanged. > > Solaris has become OpenSolaris and OpenSolaris is no longer a Sun only > enterprise. This ARC case will show whether people at Sun already understand > the fact that OpenSolaris depends on people outside of Sun that will become > disappointed in case their interests are ignored. > > Making the ON repository writable for people outside of Sun is something that > taks a long time because many technical things need to be done before. > > Understanding OpenSolaris and acting the right way is simple and only needs to > switch minds. It could be done immediately without problems. Understanding that > synergy means benefit for both sides is the first step to create a viable > OpenSolaris developer community. > > Jörg > From Richard.Matthews@sun.com Wed Aug 15 15:56:37 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FMua9j024495 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:56:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FMs6WR003202; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:54:07 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU002077M72R00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:54:07 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU008CQ7M5A6E0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:54:06 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-amer-03.sun.com ([192.18.108.177]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7FMs5x8027968; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:54:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMU00H017BYUT00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Richard.Matthews@Sun.COM); Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:54:05 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [129.152.9.14] by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMU007EU7M4LEA2@mail-amer.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:54:05 -0600 (MDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:54:03 -0500 From: Rick Matthews Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Richard.Matthews@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: James.D.Carlson@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20070109 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id l7FMua9j024495 Status: RO Content-Length: 6823 So, I think I finally get it. Joerg's argument really has to do with a -/ option in cpio/pax/tar as they exist in Solaris today would cause them to be incompatible with star and its ability to be implemented as tar/pax/cpio as a link of some sort. I couldn't figure out why it was a big deal that different commands that do similar things have similar options that do different things. While it is optimal to prevent this sort of thing, it is not a hard requirement, unless you desire to use the same binary to replace the existing three distinct commands. Joerg objection seems to be that since he would like to see star replace the current Solaris cpio/pax/tar commands with a link to star, then adding an conflicting option to cpio/pax/tar as proposed in the FastTrack is an impediment to that ever happening. Is there any proposal in front of any ARC (or approved by any ARC) to replace these Solaris commands with links to star? -- Joerg Schilling wrote: > James Carlson wrote: > > >>Joerg Schilling writes: >> >>>If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), >>>cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ >>>option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: >> >>This is the point where there's a problem. > > > The problem is that someone at Sun likes to introduce incompatible bahavor > like "... resistance is futile". > > Solaris needs and adopts OpenSource software from free sources outside of Sun. > People inside Sun are interested that these OSS programs fit nicely into > OpenSolaris. This looks like OpenSolaris is "interested" on OSS applications > that care about the needs of OpenSolaris. > > Wouldn't it be nice if there is a guesture from people inside Sun like: > "We care about your needs and hope that you care about our needs"? > > Synergy only happens if both parties benefit.... > > > >>Your version of tar has no more to do with /usr/bin/tar on OpenSolaris >>than does GNU tar, AIX tar, or any other implementation. > > > Sorry, but you seem to be uninformed abut reality! > > Star has been first written on UNOS in 1992. It has been ported to SunOS > in spring 1985. There always was the will to be compatible with /usr/bin/tar > on SunOS as far as possible. Sun started to become incompatible in the mid > 1990s. > > Then several years ago, a discussion about a better /etc/rmt from the star > package and later one about replacing /usr/bin/tar by star was under way with > Dworkin Muller. As star is written in a way that makes it highly configurable > and as a result of this discussion, the following programs have been created > and added in summer 1993 to the star packet: > > - suntar.c A program intended to be 100% compatible to Sun tar and to > replace /usr/bin/tar > > - cpio.c A program intended to be 100% compatible to Sun cpio and to > replace /usr/bin/cpio > > - pax.c A program intended to be 100% compatible to POSIX / Sun pax and > to replace /usr/bin/pax > > As star (in contrary to /usr/bin/tar) takes care about security/vulnerability > issues that are a result of hand crafted tricks in archives or a result of > side effects in archives created by careless users, star by default rejects to > unpack files in archives that may result in a compromised system. The files > in question that are a security risk and that are blocked by star in extract > mode are symlinks and hardlinks that include "/../" in the target path (these > files are not extracted) and files with a name that begins with "/" (these > files are extracted with the leading "/" striped off. Star also detects > and blocks files that are hardlinks to itself and that allow usual tar > implementations to be abused to remove files without the caller noticing the > problem. > > This behavior of star is not forbiden by POSIX and gives a significant security > improvement. > > As I do not like to create insecure replacements for /usr/bin/tar, > /usar/bin/cpio and /usr/bin/pax, the security precautions from the basic > algorithm in star is not disabled by default. Instead, the programs listed above > implement additional options -/ and -.. as star does. This was not a problem in > 2003 and it was not a problem on June 16th 2004 when PSARC 2004/480 was > approved on a PSARC meeting. At the time when the case was approved, the manual > pages have been part of the case to the options -/ and -.. have been approved > too. > > After the PSARC case was approved, Dworkin Muller left Sun. This is usually not > a problem in a big company like Sun... > > Now it seems that it was a problem with Sun. THe case was left alone and the > integration (definitely planned to take place before Solaris 10 GA) did not > happen. > > The programs tar/cpio/pax have been created to be as compatible as possible to > the Sun programs. > > Now in 2007, it looks to me as if the work that has been done in good faith > is not only ignored but worked against. > > If we do not prevent the introduction of incompatible options into tar/cpio/pax, > the plan to give Solaris modern, safe and feature rich replacements for the > dusty old implementations will be made impossible just by this planned act. > > > >>Yes, it'd be possible _in the future_ to create a project that removes >>the OpenSolaris tar sources (and pax and cpio) and replaces them with >>links to star. Yes, it might even be helpful to do so. >> >>However, that project doesn't currently exist. There is no ARC case >>that specifies it. There's no plan showing when (or if) it will ever >>show up. All that we have is a hint in 2004/480 that this "might" be >>a future project. > > > See above and understand what really happened... > > >>You're thus asking that we block an otherwise reasonable project on >>the grounds that maybe -- someday -- there might be a conflict with >>some other implementation. How far does that extend? How many other >>people have created their own personal variants of common tools? >>Should we survey them all, or do just yours alone matter? > > > Sorry, I am just requesting to prevent to implement enhancements in an > _unrasonable_ way. I am not trying to prevent feature enhancements. > This ARC case however tries to prevent future feature enhancements. > > Jörg > -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Rick Matthews email: Rick.Matthews@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. phone:+1(651) 554-1518 1270 Eagan Industrial Road phone(internal): 54418 Suite 160 fax: +1(651) 554-1540 Eagan, MN 55121-1231 USA main: +1(651) 554-1500 --------------------------------------------------------------------- From Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Wed Aug 15 16:13:22 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FNDMS8027119 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:13:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FNAceN056775; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:10:39 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU002078E2Y700@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:10:50 -0600 (MDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM ([129.153.128.104]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU008KA8E29WE0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:10:50 -0600 (MDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7FNAkre012837; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:10:46 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7FNAj7D012836; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:10:45 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:10:45 -0500 From: Nicolas Williams Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: James.D.Carlson@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <20070815231044.GX10599@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> X-Authentication-warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i Status: RO Content-Length: 887 On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 12:14:24AM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > James Carlson wrote: > > This is the point where there's a problem. > > The problem is that someone at Sun likes to introduce incompatible bahavor > like "... resistance is futile". I don't see a problem. I see a conflict in utilities of different names. As for the file format, I haven't looked but I suppose that folks who know the ins and outs of tar can tell us whether the proposed extension is interoperable. If it is, then no problem. If it isn't, THEN there would be a big problem. That is, file formats, protocols, these need to be interoperable with other implementations, whether those are integrated or not. CLIs, OTOH, need not match other implementors' choice of command-line switches/options, not even those of other implementations shipped on the same system. Nico -- From Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Wed Aug 15 16:15:23 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FNFMXL027394 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:15:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FNClSi004534; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:12:49 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU003078HB4100@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:12:47 -0600 (MDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM ([129.153.128.104]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU008NT8HA9WE0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:12:46 -0600 (MDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7FNCj7D012846; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:12:45 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7FNCjlZ012845; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:12:45 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:12:45 -0500 From: Nicolas Williams Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: lists@mcintyreweb.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com Message-id: <20070815231244.GY10599@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> X-Authentication-warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i Status: RO Content-Length: 960 On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 12:34:07AM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Hugh McIntyre" wrote: > > I hesitate to get involved in this discussion, but... > > > > > If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), > > > cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ > > > option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: > > > > > > -/ Don't strip leading slashes from file names ... > > > > It looks like GNU tar uses a different option for this behaviour: > > > > -P, --absolute-paths > > don't strip leading `/'s from file names > > If GNU tar did not try to be incompatible to star, star could be compatible to > GNU tar. But there it is. These are programs with so many options and such long histories that we just can't expect that there will be no conflicts in choice of option letters, much less exact semantics. Nico -- From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed Aug 15 16:52:43 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7FNqgYi029303 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:52:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7FNo2IB017090; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:50:07 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU00705A7GV700@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:50:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU00M10A7FQG90@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:50:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7FNgX3t103120; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:42:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7FNgXiH103117; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:42:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:42:33 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> To: Rick Matthews Cc: Joerg Schilling , psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <18115.36713.37985.508039@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 777 Rick Matthews writes: > Joerg objection seems to be that since he would like to see star replace the current > Solaris cpio/pax/tar commands with a link to star, then adding an conflicting option > to cpio/pax/tar as proposed in the FastTrack is an impediment to that ever happening. Not really. Joerg has noted (in other threads) that 'star' already behaves differently when invoked as 'tar' for compatibility reasons. > Is there any proposal in front of any ARC (or approved by any ARC) to replace these > Solaris commands with links to star? No. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From don.cragun@sun.com Wed Aug 15 17:51:46 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7G0pjWP001523 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:51:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7G0n8Ng006117; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:49:16 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU0080FCY3ZK00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:49:15 -0600 (MDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.146.226.64]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU006MSCY1PQ50@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:49:14 -0600 (MDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.64]) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6) with SMTP id l7G0nDv5008491; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:49:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Cragun Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: psarc-ext@sun.com Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Reply-to: Don Cragun Message-id: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.5.5 SunOS 5.9 sun4u sparc Content-type: TEXT/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-MD5: kHuIr0uglvYIWjmJ4rbVnA== X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id l7G0pjWP001523 Status: RO Content-Length: 278 After a lengthy discussion, this case was approved during today's PSARC meeting. Jörg's issue (the star utility uses -/ to mean something different from the way cpio, pax, and tar will use -/) was discussed in detail, but PSARC did not find his arguments compelling. - Don From jek3@sun.com Wed Aug 15 20:48:17 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7G3mGvp007053 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:48:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7G3jgpc000539; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:45:45 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU00K01L47UK00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:45:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.63]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU00J5CL47Y440@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:45:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.150.12.124] (vpn-129-150-12-124.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.12.124]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7G3jbf8962106; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:42:44 -1000 From: Joseph Kowalski Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> To: Don Cragun Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Message-id: <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060925) Status: RO Content-Length: 2975 Don Cragun wrote: > After a lengthy discussion, this case was approved during today's PSARC > meeting. Jörg's issue (the star utility uses -/ to mean something > different from the way cpio, pax, and tar will use -/) was discussed in > detail, but PSARC did not find his arguments compelling. > > - Don > I see that I missed this meeting and discussion. Its approved. Without commenting about the decision, I'd like throw out a few observations even though its already quite obvious that too many observations were made. :-) 1) Any references about a star option "introduced in 1994" is irrelevant. In 1994, star was just one of hundreds (thousands) of FOSS programs. Sun/Solaris/PSARC can't track or mediate random FOSS programs. 2) On June 16th 2004 when PSARC 2004/480 was approved, star became relevant. This is only an approval for "sfw" integration. This doesn't make it a hard rule that star/tar should share option flags, but the project team should investigate this, expose the issue (if there is one) to PSARC and decide their proposed path. PSARC can "yea" or "nea" this. 3) I believe several people have started to work with Joerg on an additional fast-track (for star) with a dependency on 2004/480. (Hence, only a review of "goodies" Joerg has added since that time.) I know Basabi spent some time with this. Since Basabi was busy, I tried to help. I was unable to get Jeorg to produce a proposal I was comfortable with. This was mostly about "getting the words right", rather than any serious contentions about the content. I think Joerg might have assumed I would write it, rather than edit it - not sure. Unfortunately, I was struck by an unexpected health problem (on June 2, to be exact). I was completely away from work for about 3 weeks and then 3 or 4 weeks at part time. Let's just say that I haven't worked on this. (Then again, Joerg was also quiet about this also.) Let's assume that somebody gets this fast-track done and approved. I think it shouldn't be hard. I *think* Joerg's position was that star should be /usr/bin/star (as opposed to /usr/sfw/bin/star), but *not* a replacement for tar. There was supposed to be a "statement of intent" that star would eventually replace tar. Had this happened, then it is clear that conflicts between tar and tar would have been addressed. 4) The fact that 2004/480 wasn't integrated is also (mostly) irrelevant. The architecture was approved. If some other project team finds that "it was in the way", then some PSARC approved remedy would result. (We need not discuss how this would be done.) 5) The fact that 2004/480 specified /usr/sfw/bin/star is relevant. That is a reflection of importance of "flag compatibility" (or non-importance). - jek3 From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 01:42:02 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7G8g16s011826 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 01:42:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7G8dL3J002776; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:39:24 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU00607YPN2Z00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 01:39:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU00614YPM0V00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 01:39:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7G8UXL7007448; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:39:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms49es.sun.com ([160.41.221.233] [160.41.221.233]) by relay42i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1129133; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:39:22 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72] [192.5.209.72]) by mms49es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2024229; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:39:21 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.24] [153.96.1.24]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-10981982; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:39:21 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7G8dKfQ027503; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:39:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7G8dJve027496 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:39:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7G8clhg029177; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:39:19 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:38:58 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:35:56 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18115.36713.37985.508039@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: Richard.Matthews@sun.com, james.d.carlson@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c40c6c.Di2DdfQASyfq+MUp%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> <18115.36713.37985.508039@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 08:38:58.0627 (UTC) FILETIME=[E386A930:01C7DFE0] Status: RO Content-Length: 910 James Carlson wrote: > Rick Matthews writes: > > Joerg objection seems to be that since he would like to see star replace the current > > Solaris cpio/pax/tar commands with a link to star, then adding an conflicting option > > to cpio/pax/tar as proposed in the FastTrack is an impediment to that ever happening. > > Not really. Joerg has noted (in other threads) that 'star' already > behaves differently when invoked as 'tar' for compatibility reasons. Correct and this ARC case tries to make this compatibility mode impossible. This is why this ARC case should not be approved. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 01:59:25 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7G8xOeH012197 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 01:59:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7G8unQt009348; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:56:53 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMU00F01ZIRYE00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:56:51 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMU00ETAZIQJW10@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:56:50 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay12i.sun.com (ip122.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.122]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7G8unZX010846; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:56:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp11es.sun.com ([160.41.209.21] [160.41.209.21]) by relay12i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-683299; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:56:49 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (relay13i.sun.com [129.179.4.123]) by mmp11es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-131494; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:56:49 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3665251; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:56:48 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7G8uj9k011268; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:56:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7G8uiil011199 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:56:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7G8ui3X000464; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:56:44 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:56:44 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:53:42 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> To: ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, psarc-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 08:56:44.0685 (UTC) FILETIME=[5EF233D0:01C7DFE3] Status: RO Content-Length: 1668 Don Cragun wrote: > After a lengthy discussion, this case was approved during today's PSARC > meeting. Jörg's issue (the star utility uses -/ to mean something > different from the way cpio, pax, and tar will use -/) was discussed in > detail, but PSARC did not find his arguments compelling. So let us conclude: - There have been no compelling arguments from the people who filed the ARC case, proving that there is is no better way to implement this feature. - Sun no longer cares about long term interface stabiliy. - Sun ignores the OpenSolaris community. - Some people inside Sun foil a correct ARC review for a bigger and complex change and bypass the process by plitting the big change into zillion small changes that are easily to approve. - The ARC commitee needs to be changed or OpenSolaris will die! If there is not a single non-Sun person from the OpenSolaris community that is allowed to at least veto decisions, the ARC decicions do not have the basis that is needed for OpenSolaris. I hope that the man pages for tar(1), cpio(1) and pax(1) will get a hint that the option -/ may in future be replaced by an option with different name without notice. I do not accept this "decision", sorry guys - you need to learn that you need to cooperate with the OpenSource community if you like to benefit from OpenSource. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From casper@holland.sun.com Thu Aug 16 02:14:01 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7G9E1GM012340 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:14:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7G9BUki004928 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:11:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00E05076SQ00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:11:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com ([129.156.101.192]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00E1U075MV00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:11:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from holland (room101.Holland.Sun.COM [129.159.130.93]) by dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7G9BLEA009964; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:11:21 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:11:21 +0200 From: Casper.Dik@sun.com Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: casper@holland.sun.com To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <200708160911.l7G9BLEA009964@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 2792 >Don Cragun wrote: > >> After a lengthy discussion, this case was approved during today's PSARC >> meeting. Jörg's issue (the star utility uses -/ to mean something >> different from the way cpio, pax, and tar will use -/) was discussed in >> detail, but PSARC did not find his arguments compelling. > >So let us conclude: > >- There have been no compelling arguments from the people who > filed the ARC case, proving that there is is no better way > to implement this feature. There is no need to provide such an argument. As long as the architecture is considered sound, there is no need to strive for the optimum. (The best is the enemy of the good) >- Sun no longer cares about long term interface stabiliy. Joerg, please don't make sweeping generlizations like that. As Joe explained, in this particular case there is no departure from an existing interface. >- Sun ignores the OpenSolaris community. No, it does not. PSARC listened to the arguments of both sides but did not feel your arguments were compelling enough. (As explained in Joe's email) >- Some people inside Sun foil a correct ARC review for a bigger > and complex change and bypass the process by plitting the big > change into zillion small changes that are easily to approve. Please Joerg, stop trying to attribute alterior motives to people making changes. A small command line change does not warrant a big ARC case nor is it a hard and fast requirement that all related changes should be in one AC case; often they are not as ARC cases are ammended. >- The ARC commitee needs to be changed or OpenSolaris will die! > If there is not a single non-Sun person from the OpenSolaris > community that is allowed to at least veto decisions, the ARC > decicions do not have the basis that is needed for OpenSolaris. There is NO-ONE who is allowed to VETO decisions; that would not give a workable situation. The ARC consists of relatively senior people with a considerable background in Solaris engienering; as such people have not climbed up through the ranks of OpenSolaris yet as we have just started, there are no non-Sun members to the ARCs. Joerg, even if you had been on PSARC I seriously doubt the outcome would have been different. The vote is a simple majority vote. > >I hope that the man pages for tar(1), cpio(1) and pax(1) will get a hint that >the option -/ may in future be replaced by an option with different name >without notice. That is extremely unlikely to happen. If star(1) is integrated as tar/cpio/pax then it will need to implement the compatibility option "/" as it is implemented now. "star" being option incompatible with tar anyway is free to implement the "/" option whichever way it pleases. I've not seen a better alternative suggested. Casper From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 03:41:29 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GAfSru014084 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 03:41:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GAcpRn015096; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:38:56 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00I0548VCA00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 03:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.43.22]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV006ZJ48V0W60@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 03:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay24.sun.com (ip192-12-251-74.block6.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.74]) by sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GAcsw9018591; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:38:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms23es.sun.com ([150.143.232.54] [150.143.232.54]) by relay24.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-569340; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:38:54 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.90]) by mms23es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1380627; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:38:54 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.24] [153.96.1.24]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-12235596; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:38:53 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GAcqI2018657; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:38:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GAco0X018616 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:38:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GAco5N006495; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:38:50 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:38:50 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:35:47 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> To: don.cragun@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 10:38:50.0295 (UTC) FILETIME=[A2181C70:01C7DFF1] Status: RO Content-Length: 4927 Don Cragun wrote: > >Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:50:25 +0200 > >From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) > > > ... ... ... > > > >If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), > >cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ > >option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: > > > > -/ Don't strip leading slashes from file names when > > extracting an archive. Tar archives containing abso- > > lute pathnames are usually a bad idea. With other tar > > implementations, they may possibly never be extracted > > without clobbering existing files. Star for that rea- > > son, by default strips leading slashes from filenames > > when in extract mode. As it may be impossible to > > create an archive where leading slashes have been > > stripped while retaining correct path names, star does > > not strip leading slashes in create mode. > > Jörg, > The only way these four cases (PSARC/2007/459 [cpio, pax, & > tar], 423 [compress, cp, pack, uncompress, & unpack], 410 [chmod], and > 394 [ls]) create any incompatibility with star is if star is intended > to replace cpio, pax, or tar. When you chose to add -/ to star, you > guaranteed that star could NEVER replace tar, cpio, or pax in /usr/bin This is if course incorrect: When _you_ chose to add -/ to Sun's current tar/cpio/pax implementation, you plan to boycott a possible future integration of an star based implemention to replace the old Sun programs. This is because _you_ chose to deliberately add an incompatible interface. > (which supply behavior conforming to SVID3, XPG3, XPG4, SUS, SUSv2, > SUSv3 and all of the POSIX standards). Stripping leading slashes from > absolute pathnames (by default) as files are extracted from archives > violates standards requirements for all of these utilities. This is a hazardous claim. I know of no part of the POSIX standard that prevents tar/cpio/pax from implementing a security aware behavior by default. It seems that you also know this - otherwise you could give a pointer that proves your claim. In fact, the behavior of the current Sun implementaions for tar/cpio/pax allow people to easily attack the integrity of Solaris installation by adding simple hand-crafted changes into tar or cpio archives that are going to be unpacked by the administrator with sufficient privileges. Star and it's different CLI implementations just care anbout vulnerability issues from hand crafted archives or archives that have been created in a problematic way by accident, the current Sun implementations of the same programs ignore this problem. > Since star cannot replace tar, cpio, or pax without changing > the default behavior of star and the meaning of the -/ option as it has > been defined by star for the last 13 years, I see no reason why -% and > -/ cannot behave as described in these four PSARC cases without causing > any incompatibilities to the existing star nor to possible future star > enhancements described in PSARC/2004/480. This is of course incorrect. Pleae inform yourself about the star project before trying to judge. The optins -/ and -.. are _needed_ in star's CLI emulations for the Sun programs in case that someone needs to switch off the "security by default" behavior. If Sun did introduce the incompatible meaning of -/, either integration of star based implementaions would be boycotted or these programs would need to become unstable just from the will of the Sun PSARC commitee. Going OpenSource with Solaris and trying to benefit from other OpenSource Software cannot be seen for serious in case that Sun claims that interface stability is important but at the same time ignores interface stability. If you like to retain interface stability, you need to follow the following rules: - Interfaces need to be defined in a way that allows them to be stable for a long time. This is true for star. - If there are possible conflicts with newer programs (like the current Sun implementations for tar/cpio/pax) the only way to retain interface stability is to use the "first come first serve" rule. The Option -/ has already been in use by star for a long time _and_ you have been warned about the problem _before_ you started to introduce incompatibility. If you introduce -/ for Sun's tar/cpio/pax, you try to prevent other software (with older rights) from retaining CLI long term stability. Now, please do your homework.... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 03:56:41 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GAueQs014753 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 03:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GAs04s026948; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:54:08 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00K094Y72D00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 03:54:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00EKN4Y7N440@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 03:54:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay23.sun.com (relay23.sun.com [192.12.251.54] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GAs6to020021; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:54:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms25es.sun.com ([150.143.232.94] [150.143.232.94]) by relay23.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-570235; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:54:03 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.90]) by mms25es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1120241; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:54:03 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.22] [153.96.1.22]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-12257782; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:54:02 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GAs0Io011415; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:54:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GArxrL011378 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:53:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GArwku007550; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:53:59 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:53:58 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:50:56 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: To: don.cragun@sun.com, ceastha@jurassic.sfbay.sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c42c10.9PtVC4IGzDTy53/q%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 10:53:58.0631 (UTC) FILETIME=[BF812F70:01C7DFF3] Status: RO Content-Length: 652 Cynthia Eastham wrote: > There have been comments saying that this case doesn't describe the format > being used. It is described in the archives.h(3HEAD) man page which were > provided in the materials directory of this case. I see no description on how the file system flags are stored inside extended attributes. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From casper@holland.sun.com Thu Aug 16 04:04:42 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GB4fh4014887 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:04:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GB23ow029453 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:02:13 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00K015BNJL00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:02:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com ([129.156.101.225]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00EDK5BMMT40@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:02:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from holland (room101.Holland.Sun.COM [129.159.130.93]) by dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GB255B003990; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:02:05 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:02:04 +0200 From: Casper.Dik@sun.com Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: casper@holland.sun.com To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: don.cragun@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 1681 >This is if course incorrect: When _you_ chose to add -/ to Sun's current >tar/cpio/pax implementation, you plan to boycott a possible future integration >of an star based implemention to replace the old Sun programs. This is because >_you_ chose to deliberately add an incompatible interface. Please do not use words like "boycott" as they convey something which clearly does not match the intention of the people integrating the software. Secondly, I don't think your statement is factual correct. Stepping over the fact that there is not even an ARC case proposing the replacement of the above mentioned commands with star, it is clearly possible to both have this option *and* later replace the commands with an star based implementation as long as there is no requirement that the star source code does not change. Even before this case, the requirement for such a replacement are fairly simple: - star will need to be able to read AND WRITE[1] all Solaris compatible formats. - star, when called as the replacement programs pax/cpio/tar will need to behave *exactly* like the current Sun implementations (they may have additional options but the existing options must be preserved and work compatibly) Both of these requirements will require work for star. I think PSARC is well aware that the second point is affected by PSARC 2007/459. Yet, having weighted the arguments pro and con they do not see this as being an undue burden, a hurdle which cannot be overcome. It is, afterall, just a simple matter of programming. Casper [1] In order to move, e.g., TX tar files to older Solaris releases which do not have an star based implementation From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 04:13:01 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GBD0bI014925 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GBAGTt021077; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:10:17 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00K0B5PHY200@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00EU85PHMV50@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay41i.sun.com ([192.5.209.70]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GB7I08013919; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:10:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms49es.sun.com ([160.41.221.233] [160.41.221.233]) by relay41i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-198525; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:10:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72] [192.5.209.72]) by mms49es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2208776; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:10:28 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.23] [153.96.1.23]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-11075035; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:10:27 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GBANk0028120; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:10:23 +0200 (MEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GBAM1D028113 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:10:23 +0200 (MEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GBAMJW008394; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:10:22 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:10:22 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:07:20 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <1187217939.909.211.camel@zippy> To: Garrett.Damore@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, lists@mcintyreweb.com, James.D.Carlson@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c42fe8.EJnBTMPf0dKTXOFZ%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <1187217939.909.211.camel@zippy> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 11:10:22.0781 (UTC) FILETIME=[0A1A8ED0:01C7DFF6] Status: RO Content-Length: 788 "Garrett D'Amore" wrote: > Mostly I've avoided this conversation, but I want to inject two cents > here. > > First, I'm sorry that Joerg feels that his effort is intentionally being > stepped on. I really don't think that is what is being done here. > There are several different implementations, and they have evolved in > incompatible ways.... It seems that you did not yet understand the background. Give me a phone call and I will explain you the problem. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 04:46:31 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GBkUq5015286 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:46:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GBho6u008520; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:43:52 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV002057932600@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV006SW7920XA0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:43:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay17i.sun.com (ip127.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.127]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GBb8f9005157; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:43:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp14es.sun.com ([160.41.209.24] [160.41.209.24]) by relay17i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-783405; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:43:49 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay17i.sun.com (relay17i.sun.com [129.179.4.127]) by mmp14es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-219104; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:43:49 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.87.18] [153.96.87.18]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3860039; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:43:48 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GBhl6a016238; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:43:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GBhkhC016164 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:43:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GBhksS011174; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:43:46 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:43:46 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:40:43 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> To: Richard.Matthews@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, James.D.Carlson@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 11:43:46.0395 (UTC) FILETIME=[B459CAB0:01C7DFFA] Status: RO Content-Length: 3464 Rick Matthews wrote: > So, I think I finally get it. Joerg's argument really has to do with > a -/ option in cpio/pax/tar as they exist in Solaris today would cause > them to be incompatible with star and its ability to be implemented as > tar/pax/cpio as a link of some sort. I couldn't figure out why it was a > big deal that different commands that do similar things have similar options > that do different things. While it is optimal to prevent this sort of thing, > it is not a hard requirement, unless you desire to use the same binary to replace > the existing three distinct commands. It seems that the reason why the problem is not discussed in the needed way is that nobody inside Sun seem to understand the problem yet. This ARC case tries to introduce incompatibility to program interfaces that have _only_ been created to give 100% compatibility for current Sun software, allowing them to replace the Sun version at a later time. It seems that some people at Sun try to boycott this future option. Bote that this would also boycott the chance to replace Closed Source in Solaris by OpenSource. Boycotting this kind of integration means boycotting the spirit of an OpenSolaris project. In addition, we ware again at the main problem of the OpenSolaris development: While there is a srong opinion that kernel development is important, user space programs are being neglected. Here is a list if problems with the current sources used by Sun for tar/cpio/pax: - PAX is a closed source program taken from the "OpenGroup". This is unlikely to change. If we like OpenSolaris to become "adult", we need to replace closed source by OpenSource and for this reason pax needs to be replaced soon. The star based pax implementation is already nearly 100% compatible... - CPIO as currently found on OpenSolaris has many problems. One is that it needs manual intervention for byte order problems between different platforms if you use the default archive format. The star based cpio implementation is already nearly 100% compatible... - TAR as currently found on OpenSolaris is slow and does not implement compatibility to POSIX incompatible GNU tar archives nor support for compression or remote archives. It misses many features from star that make the every day use much easier. The star based tar implementation is already nearly 100% compatible... Note that all these programs are just different CLI "views" on the same set of archive formats. It makes sense to replace them all by a single solution that gives the same archive features for all CLI variants. > Joerg objection seems to be that since he would like to see star replace the current > Solaris cpio/pax/tar commands with a link to star, then adding an conflicting option > to cpio/pax/tar as proposed in the FastTrack is an impediment to that ever happening. > Is there any proposal in front of any ARC (or approved by any ARC) to replace these > Solaris commands with links to star? You correctly understand that this ARC tries to boycott the option for replacing the old Sun programs by faster and more feature rich new programs. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Aug 16 04:47:49 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GBlmO3015371 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:47:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GBj8UV013811; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:45:17 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV002017BG7200@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:45:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV006DE7BF10B0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:45:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GBUFKY104390; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:30:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GBUF0d104387; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:30:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:30:15 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: [ogb-discuss] CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <18116.13639.266698.62651@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 2014 Thanks for adding ogb-discuss; that should help settle parts of this. Joerg Schilling writes: > - The ARC commitee needs to be changed or OpenSolaris will die! > If there is not a single non-Sun person from the OpenSolaris > community that is allowed to at least veto decisions, the ARC > decicions do not have the basis that is needed for > OpenSolaris. Given how destructive a veto power would be, I think it's a good thing that there's no _one_ person who can do that. There is as yet no appeals path for ARC decisions that involves the OpenSolaris community. There certainly should be, and the path should go to a community group and then (if unresolved) up to the OGB. As was done the first time an appeal was needed inside Sun, I suspect we will likely end up designing this process when we need it. However, despite your email address, you're a Sun contractor. You do have a defined appeals process available to you. That is to convince a DE or Director to support an appeal to SAC (ARC chairs). You'll need to determine grounds for an appeal. I can't find an opensolaris.org version of this document, but here's the SWAN one: http://sac.sfbay/arc/Processes/Member.Handbook/appeals.txt It's no secret. It says: Appeals fall into one of three large categories: 1. The ARC made a mistake by inappropriately applying (or divining) the rules. The appeal should include a statement of what is correct and why. 2. The ARC used the rules correctly, but the rules are wrong. The appeal should state why the rules are wrong and, if possible, what a correct rule should be. 3. The ARC is correct, and the rules are correct; a one-time exemption is requested, based on . Most appeals are based on (3). -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Thu Aug 16 04:49:18 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GBnH61015463 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:49:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GBkj91009646; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:46:46 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00M057DXZH00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:46:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.6]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00EDR7DWMV70@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:46:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d1-emea-10.sun.com ([192.18.2.120]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GBkhqQ015363; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:46:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-10.sun.com by d1-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMV00G017317Q00@d1-emea-10.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:46:43 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.136] by d1-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMV005GJ7DR8910@d1-emea-10.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:46:39 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:46:39 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: Richard.Matthews@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, James.D.Carlson@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C4391F.2080509@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070703) Status: RO Content-Length: 898 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Rick Matthews wrote: > >> So, I think I finally get it. Joerg's argument really has to do with >> a -/ option in cpio/pax/tar as they exist in Solaris today would cause >> them to be incompatible with star and its ability to be implemented as >> tar/pax/cpio as a link of some sort. I couldn't figure out why it was a >> big deal that different commands that do similar things have similar options >> that do different things. While it is optimal to prevent this sort of thing, >> it is not a hard requirement, unless you desire to use the same binary to replace >> the existing three distinct commands. > > It seems that the reason why the problem is not discussed in the needed way is > that nobody inside Sun seem to understand the problem yet. This case is closed and approved please stop sending email to this case. -- Darren J Moffat From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 04:51:20 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GBpKci015484 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:51:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GBmamW029787; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:48:37 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV002077HCK700@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:48:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV006817HB0XB0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:48:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay43i.sun.com ([192.5.209.74]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GBex61001584; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:48:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms48es.sun.com ([160.41.221.231] [160.41.221.231]) by relay43i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1158394; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:48:47 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay44i.sun.com ([192.5.209.118] [192.5.209.118]) by mms48es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2545633; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:48:46 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-11100427; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:48:46 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GBmjQr029325; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:48:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GBmid4029258 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:48:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GBmi07011529; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:48:44 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:48:44 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:45:41 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <20070815231044.GX10599@Sun.COM> To: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, James.D.Carlson@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c438e5.MMX7joOxkWGC9uId%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20070815231044.GX10599@Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 11:48:44.0403 (UTC) FILETIME=[65FA3430:01C7DFFB] Status: RO Content-Length: 976 Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 12:14:24AM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > James Carlson wrote: > > > This is the point where there's a problem. > > > > The problem is that someone at Sun likes to introduce incompatible bahavor > > like "... resistance is futile". > > I don't see a problem. > > I see a conflict in utilities of different names. So you propose that CL interfaces that have been designed to be 100% Sun compatible (as in star's tar/cpio/pax) need to be put into suntar/scpio/spax just to have another set os interfaces that emulate the incompatibilities this ARC tries to introduce? Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 04:55:09 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GBt9R4015856 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:55:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GBqct2004784; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:52:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV003057NPGI00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:52:37 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.24]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00EK67NNJWC0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:52:36 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay22.sun.com (relay22.sun.com [192.12.251.34] (may be forged)) by sca-ea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GBqZQF029443; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:52:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms24es.sun.com ([150.143.232.74] [150.143.232.74]) by relay22.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-574499; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:52:35 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.90]) by mms24es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1577815; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:52:34 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.24] [153.96.1.24]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-12359624; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:52:34 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GBqUkU017449; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:52:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw12.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GBqRiC017371 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:52:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GBnfal011585; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:49:41 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:49:41 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:46:38 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <20070815231244.GY10599@Sun.COM> To: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, lists@mcintyreweb.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c4391e.thiCspq3UE7jRJ/v%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20070815231244.GY10599@Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 11:49:41.0201 (UTC) FILETIME=[87D4E410:01C7DFFB] Status: RO Content-Length: 675 Nicolas Williams wrote: > But there it is. These are programs with so many options and such long > histories that we just can't expect that there will be no conflicts in > choice of option letters, much less exact semantics. So you propose to throw away history and allow _any_ incompatible CLI change for programs on OpenSolaris in the future? Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Aug 16 05:01:06 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GC15xW015948 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:01:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GBwTIK014028; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:58:33 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV0030X7XJMN00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:58:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV006I17XJ0RB0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:58:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GBp13w104458; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:51:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GBow6Z104451; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:50:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:50:58 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> To: Joseph Kowalski Cc: Don Cragun , psarc-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Message-id: <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 1975 Joseph Kowalski writes: > I *think* Joerg's position was that star should be /usr/bin/star (as > opposed to /usr/sfw/bin/star), but *not* a replacement for tar. Even as /usr/bin/star, I don't see a reason to overturn 2007/394. That case noted that there was _no_ common flag available for the work described in section 4.1 of 2007/315 and thus selected '-/' and '-%' for its work. When I reviewed 2007/315, I didn't know that it involved a cascade of new options for those utilities. I expected the utilities to change, but not in the command line. This series of cases has been a surprise. Personally, I'd like to do in both '@' and '/' as modifiers for programs like tar and cp. It'd make more sense to me if these utilities always copied all of the information available when both source and target support the operation rather than growing new hairball options every time we tweak a file system somewhere. That might just be me, though. > There was supposed to be a "statement of intent" that star would > eventually replace tar. > > Had this happened, then it is clear that conflicts between tar and > tar would have been addressed. Yes, but if that had happened, we would have said: the project proposing this new tar implementation came later to the ARC (and into OpenSolaris), so make it compatible with the previous projects or explain some better way forward. The current 'star' command appears to have some 151 separate options. Conflicts seem likely. And, as Don has correctly noted, it defaults to stripping the leading '/' from extracted files, which is helpful for security, but is both a POSIX violation and a clearly incompatible behavior. It can't be the default tar without changes. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 05:15:59 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GCFxVH016031 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:15:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GCDEkd035766; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:13:17 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV005178MF2N00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:13:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.43.21]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV006H18MF0VD0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:13:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay17i.sun.com (ip127.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.127]) by sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GCAP2W003259; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:13:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp12es.sun.com ([160.41.209.22] [160.41.209.22]) by relay17i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-784694; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:13:26 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (relay13i.sun.com [129.179.4.123]) by mmp12es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-237164; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:13:26 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3695113; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:13:25 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GCDOBg029360; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:13:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GCDK2c028994 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:13:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GCDKuV012776; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:13:20 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:13:20 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:10:17 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> To: jek3@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c43ea9.bphBGXudJFoXGqZD%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 12:13:20.0112 (UTC) FILETIME=[D5918700:01C7DFFE] Status: RO Content-Length: 943 Joseph Kowalski wrote: > Without commenting about the decision, I'd like throw out a > few observations even though its already quite obvious that too > many observations were made. :-) It seems that I need to comment these statements... > 1) Any references about a star option "introduced in 1994" is > irrelevant. In 1994, star was just one of hundreds (thousands) > of FOSS programs. Sun/Solaris/PSARC can't track or > mediate random FOSS programs. You are referring to a typo, it should read 1985. > 2) On June 16th 2004 when PSARC 2004/480 was approved, star > became relevant. This is only an approval for "sfw" integration. > This doesn't make it a hard rule that star/tar should share option > flags, but the project team should investigate this, expose the > issue (if there is one) to PSARC and decide their proposed path. > PSARC can "yea" or "nea" this. From 2004/480: Status: RO Content-Length: 2277 Anticipated future changes: - usr/src/cmd/cpio modified to link with librmt - usr/src/cmd/mt modified to link with librmt - either usr/src/cmd/tar modified to link with librmt, or star augmented to be a full replacement for the existing Solaris tar. If the latter is done, usr/src/cmd/tar would be removed from ON and the binary replaced with a symlink to the star executable. At that time, star and ustar may also move from /usr/sfw/sbin to /usr/sbin. > 3) I believe several people have started to work with Joerg on an > additional fast-track (for star) with a dependency on 2004/480. > (Hence, only a review of "goodies" Joerg has added since that > time.) I know Basabi spent some time with this. > > Since Basabi was busy, I tried to help. I was unable to get Jeorg > to produce a proposal I was comfortable with. This was mostly > about "getting the words right", rather than any serious contentions > about the content. I think Joerg might have assumed I would > write it, rather than edit it - not sure. No, we did aggree on that there is no need to file a new ARC case. I am curently working on the integration. > 4) The fact that 2004/480 wasn't integrated is also (mostly) > irrelevant. The architecture was approved. If some other > project team finds that "it was in the way", then some PSARC > approved remedy would result. (We need not discuss how > this would be done.) If Dworkin Muller did not leave Sun, the integration would have been done already. > 5) The fact that 2004/480 specified /usr/sfw/bin/star is relevant. > That is a reflection of importance of "flag compatibility" (or > non-importance). Given the fact that Sun recently decided to prefer to use /usr/bin for this kind of programs, I see no relevence of the path that has been mentioned in 2004/480. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Aug 16 05:18:12 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GCICVe016100 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:18:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GCFVS8023786; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:15:39 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV0040F8Q2V300@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:15:38 -0600 (MDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00EAZ8Q0K4D0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:15:37 -0600 (MDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GC87d9104499; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:08:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GC87CK104496; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:08:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:08:06 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: Richard.Matthews@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com Message-id: <18116.15910.957373.314875@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 2401 Joerg Schilling writes: > It seems that some people at Sun try to boycott this future option. There is no "boycott." I think you mean to say that you believe that the ARC members are either deliberately or ignorantly _precluding_ the option of replacing pax and other things by star in the future. This is not true. We do understand the nature of this incompatibility. We're not fools. And there is no attempt or intent to preclude _any_ future project. The nature of the incompatibility is that, when invoked as /usr/bin/tar or /usr/bin/pax, the 'star' implementation will be forced to adopt the command line behavior of those older tools, the file formats, and the documented behaviors. That requirement for backward compatibility extends even to the options and features that the author of star dislikes, such as the older '-@' and the new '-/' option. When invoked as 'star', the utility may do as it likes. It needn't support anything the other existing utilities do. But when invoked as /usr/bin/tar, that's when backward compatibility becomes important. This will be a complicated undertaking with or without this case. For example, if I do this: % cd /tmp % cp /etc/motd . % star cf test.tar /tmp/motd % star xf test.tar then, besides spewing unwanted and incompatible text out to stderr, star will also fail to extract that archive properly. It will instead create a new subdirectory and write the file /tmp/tmp/motd. It does this even when invoked as 'tar'. That's not the same as 'tar', which would (correctly) overwrite /tmp/motd. Furthermore, if I go on to do this: % star cf test.tar /tmp/motd then 'star' dies like this: star: Will not overwrite non empty plain files in compat mode. Obviously, /usr/bin/tar does not share that hesitation about overwriting files. Scripts that may have been written _assuming_ that overwrites are ok will thus fail. These changes in behavior are not compatible, and if we were to consider changing /usr/bin/tar, we'd need to fix this (and likely many other hidden incompatibilities) as well. I'd certainly like to see 'pax' removed from the system, but I don't think it's a simple change at all. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Aug 16 05:18:32 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GCIWKJ016117 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GCG431017355; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:16:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV0050J8QRBZ00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:16:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV006KC8QP11B0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:16:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GC8WwZ104509; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:08:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GC8Wct104506; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:08:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:08:32 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c4391e.thiCspq3UE7jRJ/v%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: Nicolas.Williams@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM, PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM Message-id: <18116.15936.17436.120696@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20070815231244.GY10599@Sun.COM> <46c4391e.thiCspq3UE7jRJ/v%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 696 Joerg Schilling writes: > Nicolas Williams wrote: > > > But there it is. These are programs with so many options and such long > > histories that we just can't expect that there will be no conflicts in > > choice of option letters, much less exact semantics. > > So you propose to throw away history and allow _any_ incompatible CLI change > for programs on OpenSolaris in the future? No, of course not. This isn't an incompatible change. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 05:36:17 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GCaHqY016181 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:36:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GCXlQ8021709; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:33:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV0020B9KA5E00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:33:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00EZC9K9N480@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:33:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay11i.sun.com (ip121.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.121]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GCUJEZ009332; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:33:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp12es.sun.com ([160.41.209.22] [160.41.209.22]) by relay11i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-687165; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:33:45 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay12i.sun.com (relay12i.sun.com [129.179.4.122]) by mmp12es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-250322; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:33:45 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3705881; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:33:44 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GCXeXN023559; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:33:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GCWnMN019836 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:32:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GCWmvC013956; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:32:48 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:32:48 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:29:46 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708160911.l7G9BLEA009964@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> To: Casper.Dik@Sun.COM Cc: psarc-ext@Sun.COM, ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c4433a.x3gZnVDHuKxRgJ6P%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708160911.l7G9BLEA009964@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 12:32:48.0783 (UTC) FILETIME=[8E2691F0:01C7E001] Status: RO Content-Length: 3105 Casper.Dik@sun.com wrote: > >So let us conclude: > > > >- There have been no compelling arguments from the people who > > filed the ARC case, proving that there is is no better way > > to implement this feature. > > There is no need to provide such an argument. So the ARC commitee will approve anything without discussion? This looks extremely bad. > >- Sun no longer cares about long term interface stabiliy. > > Joerg, please don't make sweeping generlizations like that. As Joe > explained, in this particular case there is no departure from an > existing interface. I did explain why this is true. If you like to respond, please give arguments. > >- Sun ignores the OpenSolaris community. > > No, it does not. PSARC listened to the arguments of both sides > but did not feel your arguments were compelling enough. I did not yet see any argument from a Sun person that verified that this person did understand the problem. Let us have a duscussion _after_ I see that there is a will to understand the problem and to look at star to understand the star philisophy. This did not happen yet! > >- Some people inside Sun foil a correct ARC review for a bigger > > and complex change and bypass the process by plitting the big > > change into zillion small changes that are easily to approve. > > Please Joerg, stop trying to attribute alterior motives to people making > changes. A small command line change does not warrant a big ARC case > nor is it a hard and fast requirement that all related changes should > be in one AC case; often they are not as ARC cases are ammended. I am not the only person who is annoyed by this way of acting. Please do not try to hide serious problems. > >- The ARC commitee needs to be changed or OpenSolaris will die! > > If there is not a single non-Sun person from the OpenSolaris > > community that is allowed to at least veto decisions, the ARC > > decicions do not have the basis that is needed for OpenSolaris. > > There is NO-ONE who is allowed to VETO decisions; that would not > give a workable situation. So anyone is able to introduce incompatibility in OpenSolaris? Then something needs to be changed. > >I hope that the man pages for tar(1), cpio(1) and pax(1) will get a hint that > >the option -/ may in future be replaced by an option with different name > >without notice. > > That is extremely unlikely to happen. If star(1) is integrated as tar/cpio/pax > then it will need to implement the compatibility option "/" as it is > implemented now. "star" being option incompatible with tar anyway is > free to implement the "/" option whichever way it pleases. OK, if star is really free to do so, Sun would need to mention that there is no grant for stability with the currently intended meaning for -/ in /usr/bin/{tar!cpio!pax} Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Thu Aug 16 05:52:21 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GCqKGh016240 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:52:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GCnj8u004197; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:49:50 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV0083RAB00200@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:49:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.5]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV006VKAAW11D0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:49:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d1-emea-10.sun.com (d1-emea-10.sun.com [192.18.2.120]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GCniH7002204; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:49:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-10.sun.com by d1-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMV00101A8LOG00@d1-emea-10.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:49:44 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.136] by d1-emea-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMV005L0AAT8910@d1-emea-10.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:49:42 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:49:41 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c43ea9.bphBGXudJFoXGqZD%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: jek3@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C447E5.2040805@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <46c43ea9.bphBGXudJFoXGqZD%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070703) Status: RO Content-Length: 542 Joerg Schilling wrote: >> 5) The fact that 2004/480 specified /usr/sfw/bin/star is relevant. >> That is a reflection of importance of "flag compatibility" (or >> non-importance). > > Given the fact that Sun recently decided to prefer to use /usr/bin for > this kind of programs, I see no relevence of the path that has been > mentioned in 2004/480. There is a HUGE relevance. Every program moving fro /usr/sfw/bin to /usr/bin needs ARC approval. 2004/480 does not give approval to ship /usr/bin/star. -- Darren J Moffat From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 05:53:51 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GCrp1u016259 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:53:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GCpGZc005502; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:51:19 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00769ADG2Q00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:51:16 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.43.22]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00705ADF3H00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:51:15 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay23.sun.com (relay23.sun.com [192.12.251.54] (may be forged)) by sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GCpEfL001596; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:51:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms23es.sun.com ([150.143.232.54] [150.143.232.54]) by relay23.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-578896; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:51:14 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms23bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms23bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.50]) by mms23es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1581492; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:51:13 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.87.18] [153.96.87.18]) by relay23.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-8559379; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:51:13 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GCpAPV009873; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:51:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GCp9gf009815 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:51:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GCp9Kt015138; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:51:09 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:51:09 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:48:07 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> To: Casper.Dik@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 12:51:09.0670 (UTC) FILETIME=[1E549860:01C7E004] Status: RO Content-Length: 3218 Casper.Dik@sun.com wrote: > > >This is if course incorrect: When _you_ chose to add -/ to Sun's current > >tar/cpio/pax implementation, you plan to boycott a possible future integration > >of an star based implemention to replace the old Sun programs. This is because > >_you_ chose to deliberately add an incompatible interface. > > Please do not use words like "boycott" as they convey something which > clearly does not match the intention of the people integrating the > software. Well, the habbit I see from some of the people here creates this impression. Feel free to correct this impression. > Secondly, I don't think your statement is factual correct. > > Stepping over the fact that there is not even an ARC case proposing > the replacement of the above mentioned commands with star, it is > clearly possible to both have this option *and* later replace the > commands with an star based implementation as long as there is > no requirement that the star source code does not change. Did you read ARC Case 2004/480? Did you notice that it contains exactly a discusssion about this option? Well, the list of incompatiblities from 2004/480 is not correct, there are much less differences than 2004/480 would make you assume. > Even before this case, the requirement for such a replacement are > fairly simple: > > - star will need to be able to read AND WRITE[1] all Solaris > compatible formats. It does this for all formats that are ducumented! Feel free to provide a documentation for the missing formats. If we aggree that you provide documentation and that none of the sun tar enhancement that has been introduced after June 16th 2004 (using deprecated methods) needs to be supported but only the functionality needs to be present, this wouls be easy to achieve. The reason why I believe that there is some kind of boycott is that Sun did introduce new functionality using outdated methods without even trying to discuss a better solution. > - star, when called as the replacement programs pax/cpio/tar > will need to behave *exactly* like the current Sun implementations > (they may have additional options but the existing options must > be preserved and work compatibly) > > Both of these requirements will require work for star. Please try ti inform yourself on the star prject. Let us continue the discussion after you did prove that you did understand the work that has already been don for this ans how it has been done. > I think PSARC is well aware that the second point is affected by > PSARC 2007/459. Yet, having weighted the arguments pro and con they > do not see this as being an undue burden, a hurdle which cannot > be overcome. It is, afterall, just a simple matter of programming. None os the "arguments" seen from Sun people for 2007/459 did verify that the problem was understood. Let us continue this discussion after something did change. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From gsf@research.att.com Thu Aug 16 05:54:21 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GCsKf0016605 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:54:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GCpcuK005242; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:51:44 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV0070PAE64O00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:51:42 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV0070SAE53K00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:51:41 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay21.sun.com (relay21.sun.com [192.12.251.14] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GCpfId003238; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:51:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms23es.sun.com ([150.143.232.54] [150.143.232.54]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-578854; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:51:41 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay22.sun.com (relay22.sun.com [192.12.251.34]) by mms23es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1582082; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:51:41 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110] [192.20.225.110]) by relay22.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-9012706; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:51:40 +0000 (Z) Received: from penguin.research.att.com (penguin.research.att.com [135.207.20.192]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 687EE8AF9; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:51:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from gsf@localhost) by penguin.research.att.com (8.13.1/8.12.10/Submit) id l7GCpLGx031811; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:51:21 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:51:21 -0400 From: Glenn Fowler Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: james.d.carlson@sun.com, Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, Richard.Matthews@sun.com Message-id: <200708161251.l7GCpLGx031811@penguin.research.att.com> Organization: AT&T Research MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: mailx (AT&T/BSD) 9.9 2006-04-17 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.15910.957373.314875@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Status: RO Content-Length: 263 On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:08:06 -0400 James Carlson wrote: > I'd certainly like to see 'pax' removed from the system, but I don't > think it's a simple change at all. what does 'removed from the system' mean? -- Glenn Fowler -- AT&T Research, Florham Park NJ -- From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Thu Aug 16 05:58:08 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GCw86k016626 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:58:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GCtdM5027423; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:55:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00307AKR9Y00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:55:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.5]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00EOMAKPMQ90@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:55:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d1-emea-09.sun.com (d1-emea-09.sun.com [192.18.2.119]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GCtb1H002916; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:55:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-09.sun.com by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMV00601AJ33W00@d1-emea-09.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:55:37 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.136] by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMV001BFAKNCB00@d1-emea-09.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:55:36 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:55:35 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: Casper.Dik@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070703) Status: RO Content-Length: 470 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Please try ti inform yourself on the star prject. Let us continue the > discussion after you did prove that you did understand the work that has > already been don for this ans how it has been done. Please do us the same courtesy and get informed on how the ARC process works - it is documented in the arc community on opensolaris.org. This case was approved and is now closed. Please stop the discussion of it here. -- Darren J Moffat From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Aug 16 06:25:16 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GDPGYY016948 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GDMlPg005376; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:22:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00407BTXIO00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:22:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00ESMBTWMVC0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:22:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GD7V3O104801; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:07:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GD7Ssc104798; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:07:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:07:28 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708161251.l7GCpLGx031811@penguin.research.att.com> To: Glenn Fowler Cc: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, Richard.Matthews@sun.com Message-id: <18116.19472.660995.778002@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.15910.957373.314875@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <200708161251.l7GCpLGx031811@penguin.research.att.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 660 Glenn Fowler writes: > > On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:08:06 -0400 James Carlson wrote: > > I'd certainly like to see 'pax' removed from the system, but I don't > > think it's a simple change at all. > > what does 'removed from the system' mean? Discard the closed-source stuff we've been saddled with, and replace with something that can be included in OpenSolaris. It doesn't mean removing /usr/bin/pax itself. Just the implementation. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 06:41:31 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GDfVt8016989 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:41:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GDcx3o002722; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:39:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00507CKZ9J00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:38:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00EQFCKYMTC0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:38:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (ip123.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.123]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GDae3M020317; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:38:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp13es.sun.com ([160.41.209.23] [160.41.209.23]) by relay13i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-703362; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:38:57 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (relay13i.sun.com [129.179.4.123]) by mmp13es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-285456; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:38:56 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2995538; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:38:56 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GDctAv014417; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:38:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GDcs1Q014347 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:38:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GDcs1e018605; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:38:54 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:38:54 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:35:51 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: jek3@sun.com, james.d.carlson@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 13:38:54.0494 (UTC) FILETIME=[C9E60BE0:01C7E00A] Status: RO Content-Length: 4285 James Carlson wrote: I am glad to see that you try to start a formal and techical based discussion. > Joseph Kowalski writes: > > I *think* Joerg's position was that star should be /usr/bin/star (as > > opposed to /usr/sfw/bin/star), but *not* a replacement for tar. > > Even as /usr/bin/star, I don't see a reason to overturn 2007/394. > That case noted that there was _no_ common flag available for the work > described in section 4.1 of 2007/315 and thus selected '-/' and '-%' > for its work. While it is bad practice not to use a uniform interface for many tools implementing the same feature (and this is why I did already send mail for the ls(1) call in June), there is no real conflict for "star". There is however a conflict with the interfaces that have been build just to create Solaris compatibility. This case breaks compatibility with these interfaces. > When I reviewed 2007/315, I didn't know that it involved a cascade of > new options for those utilities. I expected the utilities to change, > but not in the command line. This series of cases has been a > surprise. > > Personally, I'd like to do in both '@' and '/' as modifiers for > programs like tar and cp. It'd make more sense to me if these > utilities always copied all of the information available when both > source and target support the operation rather than growing new > hairball options every time we tweak a file system somewhere. The cpio philosophy would not need in extract mode as cpio by default extracts permission (although not time stamps). You could create a new archive format name that includes support for including these information in create mode. If you did not do this, you would get into problems when trying to exchange data with other platforms. The correct way of implementing these features in pax would be either by extending the supported parameter to the -p option or by using the -o option. When extracting an archive that contains the extensions, -pe should extract all available data. If the -o option would be used, it would be something like: -o xattr See: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/pax.html The tar command by default behaves similar to cpio, excapt that you may switch off to extract some of the properties. This ARC case is not really aligned with the POSIX philosohy of the commands. BTW: Don should know that this arc case is in conflict with the POSIX philosohy because it tries to implement functionality in a way that is not aligned with the way POSIX defines extensions. > That might just be me, though. > > > There was supposed to be a "statement of intent" that star would > > eventually replace tar. > > > > Had this happened, then it is clear that conflicts between tar and > > tar would have been addressed. > > Yes, but if that had happened, we would have said: the project > proposing this new tar implementation came later to the ARC (and into > OpenSolaris), so make it compatible with the previous projects or > explain some better way forward. OK, the proposal to use -/ came definitely after it did appear in the interfaces that have been created for compatibility with the Sun commands. > The current 'star' command appears to have some 151 separate options. > Conflicts seem likely. There is a small list, see ~ line 2450 in star.c The conflicts between /usr/bin/tar and star all have been created by Sun. The related option have been introduced into star around 1985. The conflicts did not exist before SunOS-5.x came out. > And, as Don has correctly noted, it defaults to stripping the leading > '/' from extracted files, which is helpful for security, but is both a > POSIX violation and a clearly incompatible behavior. It can't be the > default tar without changes. Don should know that there is no POSIX violation. He did not prove his claim with a pointer to the POSIX standard, judge yourself whom to believe..... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 07:07:49 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GE7nds017599 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:07:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GE51ll003462; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:05:04 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00D6XDSS4100@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:05:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV008E5DSPFK30@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:05:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (ip125.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.125]) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GE1F1e002298; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:05:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp13es.sun.com ([160.41.209.23] [160.41.209.23]) by relay15i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-739789; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:05:10 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay16i.sun.com (relay16i.sun.com [129.179.4.126]) by mmp13es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-298813; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:05:09 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.87.18] [153.96.87.18]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2973025; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:05:09 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GE58S5028243; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:05:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GE57SM028178 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:05:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GE57Jl020564; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:05:07 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:05:07 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:02:04 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18116.15910.957373.314875@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: james.d.carlson@sun.com Cc: Richard.Matthews@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c458dc.h/Hro5D5kPCccia3%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.15910.957373.314875@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 14:05:07.0143 (UTC) FILETIME=[73453D70:01C7E00E] Status: RO Content-Length: 4588 James Carlson wrote: > I think you mean to say that you believe that the ARC members are > either deliberately or ignorantly _precluding_ the option of replacing > pax and other things by star in the future. > > This is not true. We do understand the nature of this > incompatibility. We're not fools. And there is no attempt or intent > to preclude _any_ future project. Why then do you try to include new incompatible options that prevent to implement the option of replacing the programs? > The nature of the incompatibility is that, when invoked as > /usr/bin/tar or /usr/bin/pax, the 'star' implementation will be forced > to adopt the command line behavior of those older tools, the file > formats, and the documented behaviors. That requirement for backward > compatibility extends even to the options and features that the author > of star dislikes, such as the older '-@' and the new '-/' option. This is not true: Even though the way of using -@ is questionable, the main problem with the implementation of the functionality is that it is based on deprecated methods from POSIX.1-1988 instead of being based on portable and vendor tagged POSIX.1-2001 methods. When Sun tar introduced a preliminary implementation of the POSIX.1-2001 tar extensions for Solaris 7 (via -E), Sun tar was the leading edge and it seems that the person who did this implementation did really understand the POSIX philosophy. The fact that Sun did not update this preliminary implementation by a fully POSIX.1-2001 based extended tar format did throw Sun's tar back to the stoneage. All additions that have been implemented in sun tar lateron, look as if they have been done by people who do not really care about the POSIX standard but just did like top get something like an imposition done fast whithout trying to imform about the current technology first. > When invoked as 'star', the utility may do as it likes. It needn't > support anything the other existing utilities do. But when invoked as > /usr/bin/tar, that's when backward compatibility becomes important. This was implemented, but this kind of compatibility will be destroyed by accepting the current ARC case. > This will be a complicated undertaking with or without this case. For > example, if I do this: > > % cd /tmp > % cp /etc/motd . > % star cf test.tar /tmp/motd > % star xf test.tar > > then, besides spewing unwanted and incompatible text out to stderr, > star will also fail to extract that archive properly. It will instead > create a new subdirectory and write the file /tmp/tmp/motd. It does > this even when invoked as 'tar'. That's not the same as 'tar', which > would (correctly) overwrite /tmp/motd. Would you please be so kind to inform you correctly about star instead of just trying to pretend this? > Furthermore, if I go on to do this: > > % star cf test.tar /tmp/motd > > then 'star' dies like this: > > star: Will not overwrite non empty plain files in compat mode. > > Obviously, /usr/bin/tar does not share that hesitation about > overwriting files. Scripts that may have been written _assuming_ that > overwrites are ok will thus fail. Do you know the difference between the term "star" and the term "tar"? Star is not completely compatible to the SUS "tar" standard by intention in order to give more security and to be more safe against accidental problems. Star implements it's own philosophy under the name "star". The "star" CLI gives you access to all features from tar, all features from cpio and all features fom pax in one single command. Star also implements additional features (like e.g. a built in find(1)). As star is highly configurable and written similar to a library, it is simple to introduce compatibility CLI programs. How these programs behave, is negotiable, but even there, I take backwards compatibility very seriously. The current ARC case is in conflict with this kind of backwards compatibility. > I'd certainly like to see 'pax' removed from the system, but I don't > think it's a simple change at all. This is not as hard as you may believe. Every incompatible extension such as the attempt to approve this arc case makes it harder... If you are interested, let us diccuss the technical problems. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 07:08:29 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GE8TnI017618 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:08:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GE5tZ2010721; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:05:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00B0TDTZ2V00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:05:59 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV007F3DTX3H70@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:05:58 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay17i.sun.com (ip127.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.127]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GE5v3P010249; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:05:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp11es.sun.com ([160.41.209.21] [160.41.209.21]) by relay17i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-789331; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:05:57 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (relay15i.sun.com [129.179.4.125]) by mmp11es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-300637; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:05:56 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2991341; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:05:56 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GE5tbH000427; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:05:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GE5hpN029608 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:05:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GE5hxX020607; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:05:43 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:05:44 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:02:41 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18116.15936.17436.120696@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: james.d.carlson@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, Nicolas.Williams@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c45901.2101JfmkuGWizdvU%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <20070815231244.GY10599@Sun.COM> <46c4391e.thiCspq3UE7jRJ/v%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.15936.17436.120696@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 14:05:44.0098 (UTC) FILETIME=[894C2020:01C7E00E] Status: RO Content-Length: 903 James Carlson wrote: > Joerg Schilling writes: > > Nicolas Williams wrote: > > > > > But there it is. These are programs with so many options and such long > > > histories that we just can't expect that there will be no conflicts in > > > choice of option letters, much less exact semantics. > > > > So you propose to throw away history and allow _any_ incompatible CLI change > > for programs on OpenSolaris in the future? > > No, of course not. This isn't an incompatible change. Please read my last mail for a more in dept explanation...... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 07:11:47 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GEBlBI017637 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:11:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GE8vJ7004628; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:08:58 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00D0RDZ9EL00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:09:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV008HUDZ7FL40@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:09:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (ip123.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.123]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GE58F1028990; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:09:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp11es.sun.com ([160.41.209.21] [160.41.209.21]) by relay13i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-704485; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:09:06 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay16i.sun.com (relay16i.sun.com [129.179.4.126]) by mmp11es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-302227; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:09:06 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.87.18] [153.96.87.18]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-2973441; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:09:05 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GE94Nm009765; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:09:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GE93QX009707 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:09:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GE93vV020845; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:09:03 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:09:03 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:06:01 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> To: Darren.Moffat@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, Casper.Dik@sun.com Message-id: <46c459c9.fy6Da1v95IvU+cZe%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 14:09:03.0993 (UTC) FILETIME=[0071AE90:01C7E00F] Status: RO Content-Length: 938 Darren J Moffat wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Please try ti inform yourself on the star prject. Let us continue the > > discussion after you did prove that you did understand the work that has > > already been don for this ans how it has been done. > > Please do us the same courtesy and get informed on how the ARC process > works - it is documented in the arc community on opensolaris.org. This > case was approved and is now closed. Please stop the discussion of it here. As there was no technically based discussion yet, it is most unlikely that an "ARC process" did take place on this proposal. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Aug 16 07:28:22 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GESLhM017967 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:28:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GEPjUZ010688; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:25:50 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00E0NER1ID00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:25:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV008UAEQTFO40@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:25:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GEIC8e105050; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:18:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GEICAM105047; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:18:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:18:12 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: jek3@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 6651 Joerg Schilling writes: > > Even as /usr/bin/star, I don't see a reason to overturn 2007/394. > > That case noted that there was _no_ common flag available for the work > > described in section 4.1 of 2007/315 and thus selected '-/' and '-%' > > for its work. > > While it is bad practice not to use a uniform interface for many > tools implementing the same feature (and this is why I did already > send mail for the ls(1) call in June), there is no real conflict for "star". > There is however a conflict with the interfaces that have been build just to > create Solaris compatibility. Understood. However, those interfaces have not been the subject of any approved or even filed ARC case. The best we have is a discussion of "intent" in a different case that approves integration of 'star' alone. "Intent" by itself doesn't confer any special status or privilege to those features -- which may not in fact ever arrive. In this instance, it's been three years since we saw that old 'star' case, and nothing's happened. > This case breaks compatibility with these interfaces. No. If those interfaces are ever proposed to replace /usr/bin/tar in OpenSolaris (new "projects" in ARC parlance; new cases), then they'll need to conform to the existing expectations *AT THAT TIME* for /usr/bin/tar. The project under discussion here (the one that, as Darren notes, has already been approved and thus that for clarity we shouldn't be discussing here at _all_) forces a change on the implementation if it chooses to migrate to /usr/bin/tar in the future. It hasn't done so, so no force is applied now by this case. However, that's also true if someone else decided to port over GNU tar to become /usr/bin/tar on Solaris. They'd have to explain how they were going to make the command line compatible in doing so. And it's true if someone took the current NetBSD tar and ported that over. And it's true if IBM suddenly decided to open-source AIX and we brought over their /usr/bin/tar. In other words, star is one of a field of possible things that could be used. There is no ARC project describing what future projects may or may not do with /usr/bin/tar options, so we're not bound by that universe of possible replacements. We're bound by history of /usr/bin/tar, consistency with existing system features, and the needs of the project team that is asking for change. An interesting side issue here is that while the ARC is bound to the history embedded in the OpenSolaris sources, the distributors themselves are not so bound. If some distribution wanted to replace /usr/bin/tar with a link to 'star', then have at it. They won't get the benefits of backward compatibility that we're offering, but that's certainly a rational choice they can make. > The correct way of implementing these features in pax would be either by > extending the supported parameter to the -p option or by using the -o option. > When extracting an archive that contains the extensions, -pe should extract all > available data. If the -o option would be used, it would be something > like: -o xattr I agree that '-p /' would make more sense for pax here. > BTW: Don should know that this arc case is in conflict with the POSIX philosohy > because it tries to implement functionality in a way that is not aligned with > the way POSIX defines extensions. I agree that '@', '/', 'T', 'p' are just plain backwards for tar itself, which is why I pointed out that I'd rather not have them. There's unforunately a lot of old Sun history here, and ignoring that is difficult. > > Yes, but if that had happened, we would have said: the project > > proposing this new tar implementation came later to the ARC (and into > > OpenSolaris), so make it compatible with the previous projects or > > explain some better way forward. > > OK, the proposal to use -/ came definitely after it did appear in the > interfaces that have been created for compatibility with the Sun commands. No, not as far as we're concerned. Those supposed "interfaces" are not the subject of any ARC case. The only approved case we have is for /usr/sfw/bin/star, and 'star' (as a different program altogether) is free to do whatever it wants, including wierd "FIFO" options. By the logic you're suggesting, we're also bound by every implementation that everyone everywhere has ever made. We need to be omniscient. We're not. We're bound by the projects that the ARC has approved, and by the ones that are in OpenSolaris. We're bound by standards commitments, and by an attempt to stay as true as we can to BSD and SysV roots, and by newer attempts to be compatible with GNUish systems. > > The current 'star' command appears to have some 151 separate options. > > Conflicts seem likely. > > There is a small list, see ~ line 2450 in star.c Now try rationalizing across multiple utilities. That's what the project team did. > The conflicts between /usr/bin/tar and star all have been created by Sun. > The related option have been introduced into star around 1985. The conflicts > did not exist before SunOS-5.x came out. That may be true, but isn't material here. > > And, as Don has correctly noted, it defaults to stripping the leading > > '/' from extracted files, which is helpful for security, but is both a > > POSIX violation and a clearly incompatible behavior. It can't be the > > default tar without changes. > > Don should know that there is no POSIX violation. He did not prove his claim > with a pointer to the POSIX standard, judge yourself whom to believe..... http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xcu/tar.html It says nothing about (mis)interpreting an absolute path name as a relative one, or about switching that behavior on or off. (I'd like to see star passed through the validation suite. Perhaps the folks who manage those tests can arrange something.) In any event, regardless of what one thinks about POSIX, the behavior of star is incompatible with the existing /usr/bin/tar. It's incompatible because star made an implementation change (forcing absolute paths to be relative) that historical tar did not have. You can certainly argue that star's behavior is "better." You can't argue that it's compatible. And that's the tip of the iceberg. A case that proposes replacing /usr/bin/tar would have to plumb the depth of these incompatibilities and discuss each one. Fortunately, that's not this case. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Aug 16 07:29:22 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GETM3s018032 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:29:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GEQo9P023907; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:26:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00E07ESQJR00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:26:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00821ESMFL60@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:26:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GEJGwj105060; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:19:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GEJGuk105057; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:19:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:19:16 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c459c9.fy6Da1v95IvU+cZe%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: Darren.Moffat@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, Casper.Dik@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <18116.23780.624210.329821@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> <46c459c9.fy6Da1v95IvU+cZe%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 431 Joerg Schilling writes: > As there was no technically based discussion yet, it is most unlikely that > an "ARC process" did take place on this proposal. I believe you're gravely misinformed on that point. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Aug 16 07:38:22 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GEcL6B018368 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:38:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GEZh8q016704; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:35:47 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00F07F7KA500@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:35:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV008GVF7HFO50@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:35:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GESB3Z105101; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:28:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GESBr2105098; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:28:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:28:11 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c458dc.h/Hro5D5kPCccia3%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: Richard.Matthews@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <18116.24315.552094.875393@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.15910.957373.314875@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c458dc.h/Hro5D5kPCccia3%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 3438 Joerg Schilling writes: > James Carlson wrote: > > I think you mean to say that you believe that the ARC members are > > either deliberately or ignorantly _precluding_ the option of replacing > > pax and other things by star in the future. > > > > This is not true. We do understand the nature of this > > incompatibility. We're not fools. And there is no attempt or intent > > to preclude _any_ future project. > > Why then do you try to include new incompatible options that prevent to > implement the option of replacing the programs? I didn't try to include anything. I don't know why you're confusing me with the project team or with the ARC itself. Nor do I believe that the project team proposing this change is attempting to prevent any such thing. This project (like many that have preceded it) forces a requirement onto such a future replacement project. It does _not_ prevent such a project. > > The nature of the incompatibility is that, when invoked as > > /usr/bin/tar or /usr/bin/pax, the 'star' implementation will be forced > > to adopt the command line behavior of those older tools, the file > > formats, and the documented behaviors. That requirement for backward > > compatibility extends even to the options and features that the author > > of star dislikes, such as the older '-@' and the new '-/' option. > > This is not true: Yes, it is true, because this is the nature of backward compatibility. It's one of the most important things we (in the ARC) enforce. You won't get to pass "go" without it. > Even though the way of using -@ is questionable, the main problem with the > implementation of the functionality is that it is based on deprecated methods > from POSIX.1-1988 instead of being based on portable and vendor tagged > POSIX.1-2001 methods. In evaluating compatible change in OpenSolaris, that doesn't actually matter. You may be right that it's poorly designed. You may be right that a suitable "expert" would have done it differently. However, none of that matters to a user who is trying to extract an archive created by an older system using this existing format, or create an archive to transfer to such a system. What matters in those cases is compatibility. > philosophy. The fact that Sun did not update this preliminary implementation > by a fully POSIX.1-2001 based extended tar format did throw Sun's tar back to > the stoneage. All additions that have been implemented in sun tar lateron, That may be true. It's also irrelevant. > > When invoked as 'star', the utility may do as it likes. It needn't > > support anything the other existing utilities do. But when invoked as > > /usr/bin/tar, that's when backward compatibility becomes important. > > This was implemented, but this kind of compatibility will be destroyed by > accepting the current ARC case. Nonsense. It forces _more_ work onto such a future project, but it does _not_ prevent it. You've failed to explain how this case actually _prevents_ anything from occurring in the future. > Do you know the difference between the term "star" and the term "tar"? No, of course not. Like most of the people on this list, I live to be insulted. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 07:42:14 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GEgE64018653 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:42:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GEdiLu027561; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:39:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00C3ZFE6TK00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:39:42 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV007P1FE33HA0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:39:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay13i.sun.com (ip123.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.123]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GEbYTU019411; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:39:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp14es.sun.com ([160.41.209.24] [160.41.209.24]) by relay13i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-705835; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:39:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay17i.sun.com (relay17i.sun.com [129.179.4.127]) by mmp14es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-317318; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:39:38 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.22] [153.96.1.22]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3012825; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:39:38 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GEdbTc009135; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:39:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw10.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GEdaMo009116 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:39:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GEda9T023134; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:39:36 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:39:37 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:36:34 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18116.24315.552094.875393@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: james.d.carlson@sun.com Cc: Richard.Matthews@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c460f2.MHGd/tlbls0rc+VN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.15910.957373.314875@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c458dc.h/Hro5D5kPCccia3%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.24315.552094.875393@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 14:39:37.0009 (UTC) FILETIME=[4501BA10:01C7E013] Status: RO Content-Length: 716 James Carlson wrote: > > Do you know the difference between the term "star" and the term "tar"? > > No, of course not. Like most of the people on this list, I live to be Then you should do some tests with star being called as "tar" and compare it's behavor to the behavior defined in: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xcu/tar.html You will not be able to find a deviation. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 07:51:22 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GEpM5v018894 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:51:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GEmqDm000484; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00D07FTHIE00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:48:53 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.43.21]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV007IRFTG3HB0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:48:52 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay23.sun.com (relay23.sun.com [192.12.251.54] (may be forged)) by sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GEmpbb004487; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:48:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms23es.sun.com ([150.143.232.54] [150.143.232.54]) by relay23.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-590541; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:48:51 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.70]) by mms23es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1749491; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:48:51 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay24.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-8877847; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:48:50 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GEmnNn001459; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:48:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GEmmPB001384 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:48:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GEmm7u023582; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:48:48 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:48:48 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:45:45 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: james.d.carlson@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 14:48:48.0664 (UTC) FILETIME=[8DD19980:01C7E014] Status: RO Content-Length: 1807 James Carlson wrote: Let me try to first avoid to discuss things that are arguable... > > Don should know that there is no POSIX violation. He did not prove his claim > > with a pointer to the POSIX standard, judge yourself whom to believe..... > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xcu/tar.html > > It says nothing about (mis)interpreting an absolute path name as a > relative one, or about switching that behavior on or off. Correct, it does not forbid the behavor that has been chosen to make tar more safe. If you are looking for something that could be called incorrect, it would be archives that include absolute path names. > (I'd like to see star passed through the validation suite. Perhaps > the folks who manage those tests can arrange something.) I would be interested to see a result from such a test. Note that Sun's tar did not pass my tests for POSIX compatibility before November 2004. Then Sun did start to use my tests.... > In any event, regardless of what one thinks about POSIX, the behavior > of star is incompatible with the existing /usr/bin/tar. It's > incompatible because star made an implementation change (forcing > absolute paths to be relative) that historical tar did not have. You > can certainly argue that star's behavior is "better." You can't argue > that it's compatible. Sorry, but this is not an incompatible change. Is is a change that prevents problems and all up to date tar implementations behave this way. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From stevel@sun.com Thu Aug 16 08:26:01 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GFQ1ek020516 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:26:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GFNVaF006206; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:23:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00J35HF9AK00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:23:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV0086CHF8FIA0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:23:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.228.82] (donuthole.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.228.82]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GFNVnY132160; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:23:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:24:27 -0700 From: Stephen Lau Subject: Re: [ogb-discuss] CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C46C2B.7090101@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070723) Status: RO Content-Length: 2458 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Don Cragun wrote: > >> After a lengthy discussion, this case was approved during today's PSARC >> meeting. Jörg's issue (the star utility uses -/ to mean something >> different from the way cpio, pax, and tar will use -/) was discussed in >> detail, but PSARC did not find his arguments compelling. > > So let us conclude: > > - There have been no compelling arguments from the people who > filed the ARC case, proving that there is is no better way > to implement this feature. > > - Sun no longer cares about long term interface stabiliy. > > - Sun ignores the OpenSolaris community. > > - Some people inside Sun foil a correct ARC review for a bigger > and complex change and bypass the process by plitting the big > change into zillion small changes that are easily to approve. > > - The ARC commitee needs to be changed or OpenSolaris will die! > If there is not a single non-Sun person from the OpenSolaris > community that is allowed to at least veto decisions, the ARC > decicions do not have the basis that is needed for OpenSolaris. > > > I hope that the man pages for tar(1), cpio(1) and pax(1) will get a hint that > the option -/ may in future be replaced by an option with different name > without notice. > > I do not accept this "decision", sorry guys - you need to learn that you need > to cooperate with the OpenSource community if you like to benefit from OpenSource. What is your intent here Joerg? Are you appealing this to the OGB? or just vocalising your disagreement? (It's not clear to me from your above email what your desire is) It's not clear to me how the Community Group appeal's process interacts with the PSARC appeals process (which from what I can tell seems to be a Sun internal process). If you're appealing formally, then I'll ask if this is really a governance issue. I understand you disagree with PSARC's resolution, but it's not clear to me that the OGB can or should have anything to do here. I can't speak for the other board members, but I know I certainly don't have enough experience or desire to go about overriding the exact sort of decision PSARC has been chartered and tasked to make. If you're just vocalising your disagreement, then I'll kindly request you drop ogb-discuss from the CC list. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // stevel@sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Thu Aug 16 08:40:59 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GFewYF020728 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:40:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GFat1v010576; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:38:29 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00K09I3QGB00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:38:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV0082HI3PFEA0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:38:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GFUe1t105466; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:30:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GFUe2V105463; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:30:40 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:30:40 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, jek3@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <18116.28064.376384.587036@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id l7GFewYF020728 Status: RO Content-Length: 3235 Joerg Schilling writes: > > In any event, regardless of what one thinks about POSIX, the behavior > > of star is incompatible with the existing /usr/bin/tar. It's > > incompatible because star made an implementation change (forcing > > absolute paths to be relative) that historical tar did not have. You > > can certainly argue that star's behavior is "better." You can't argue > > that it's compatible. > > Sorry, but this is not an incompatible change. Is is a change that prevents > problems and all up to date tar implementations behave this way. I've already shown how it produces different results. It does so even when invoked as "tar." I see that the odd "cf" overwrite restriction goes away when renamed to 'tar'. The other changes do not. I'm using star 1.5a74. I've also tried 1.5a80 with the same results. Perhaps there's a newer version that lacks incompatibilities. I don't know, and this really isn't the thread in which to discuss such things. Instead, this should be the topic of a future case that proposes replacing /usr/bin/tar. As pointed out repeatedly, this is _not_ that case, and that case does _not_ exist. Observe: % ls -l /opt/csw/bin/tar lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 Jul 31 11:21 /opt/csw/bin/tar -> star % /opt/csw/bin/tar --version suntar: star 1.5a80 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) Copyright (C) 1985, 88-90, 92-96, 98, 99, 2000-2007 Jörg Schilling This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. % /opt/csw/bin/tar cf foo.tar /tmp/motd /opt/csw/bin/tar: 1 blocks + 0 bytes (total of 10240 bytes = 10.00k). % /opt/csw/bin/tar xf foo.tar /tmp/motd /opt/csw/bin/tar: WARNING: skipping leading '/' on filenames. /opt/csw/bin/tar: '/tmp/motd' did not match /opt/csw/bin/tar: 1 blocks + 0 bytes (total of 10240 bytes = 10.00k). There's the first incompatibility. It fails to match files that are clearly in the archive, because it's errantly skipping over the leading '/' mark. % /opt/csw/bin/tar xf foo.tar /opt/csw/bin/tar: WARNING: skipping leading '/' on filenames. /opt/csw/bin/tar: 1 blocks + 0 bytes (total of 10240 bytes = 10.00k). % ls -l /tmp/tmp/motd -rw-r--r-- 1 carlsonj staff 720 Aug 16 11:22 /tmp/tmp/motd There's the second incompatibility. It's extracting to a different location than the one that was archived. I understand _why_ this was done and the security problems inherent in (especially) allowing root to extract absolute files from an archive. However, at the same time, this change is not compatible and _will_ break consumers that rely on the existing behavior. It's unclear to me whether the stderr spewage will break anything, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does. Most common utilities don't write to stderr unless there's actually an error. Sending success messages there is really strange. A future case that deals with replacing /usr/bin/tar will _have_ to deal with these incompatibilities in detail. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From gsf@research.att.com Thu Aug 16 08:46:17 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GFkGYF020863 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:46:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GFhYx1015126; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 23:43:44 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00G07ICSA400@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:43:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.43.22]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00FQNICRCO10@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:43:39 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay22.sun.com (relay22.sun.com [192.12.251.34] (may be forged)) by sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GFhcij012792; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:43:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms23es.sun.com ([150.143.232.54] [150.143.232.54]) by relay22.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-597176; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:43:38 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms23bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms23bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.50]) by mms23es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1835200; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:43:38 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110] [192.20.225.110]) by relay23.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-8756951; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:43:38 +0000 (Z) Received: from penguin.research.att.com (penguin.research.att.com [135.207.20.192]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAF148AD5; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:43:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from gsf@localhost) by penguin.research.att.com (8.13.1/8.12.10/Submit) id l7GFhVQE024086; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:43:31 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:43:31 -0400 From: Glenn Fowler Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: james.d.carlson@sun.com, Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <200708161543.l7GFhVQE024086@penguin.research.att.com> Organization: AT&T Research MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: mailx (AT&T/BSD) 9.9 2006-04-17 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 1344 On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:45:45 +0200 Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote: > James Carlson wrote: > Let me try to first avoid to discuss things that are arguable... > > > Don should know that there is no POSIX violation. He did not prove his claim > > > with a pointer to the POSIX standard, judge yourself whom to believe..... > > > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xcu/tar.html > > > > It says nothing about (mis)interpreting an absolute path name as a > > relative one, or about switching that behavior on or off. > Correct, it does not forbid the behavor that has been chosen to make tar more > safe. apologies for posting to a closed case but I can't let this one go an application does not have carte blanche to do operation X simply because the standard does not forbid operation X e.g., "it didn't say I couldn't kill(-1,9)" there are other complications suppose the archive contains the symbolic link /somedir/foo -> /dev/null does the default "tar will be safe" mode interpret this as ./somedir/foo -> ./dev/null or ./somedir/foo -> /dev/null I don't even need an answer for this the choice taken will be wrong for at least 2/3 of the users (considering the unmangled /somedir/foo -> /dev/null case too) -- Glenn Fowler -- AT&T Research, Florham Park NJ -- From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 09:01:25 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GG1Oxr021469 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:01:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GFwTPX018861; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:58:53 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00B0VJ244K00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:58:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV007F5J22IMD0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 08:58:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay22.sun.com (relay22.sun.com [192.12.251.34] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GFwonj004467; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:58:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms25es.sun.com ([150.143.232.94] [150.143.232.94]) by relay22.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-599019; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:58:40 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms25bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.90]) by mms25es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1577785; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:58:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.23] [153.96.1.23]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-12747256; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:58:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GFw9mr002912; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:58:09 +0200 (MEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GFw885002900 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:58:09 +0200 (MEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GFw8js027302; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:58:08 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:58:08 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:55:05 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708161543.l7GFhVQE024086@penguin.research.att.com> To: James.D.Carlson@sun.com, gsf@research.att.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c47359.I6kWzW84KcR+MBPM%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161543.l7GFhVQE024086@penguin.research.att.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 15:58:08.0801 (UTC) FILETIME=[3D742110:01C7E01E] Status: RO Content-Length: 1833 Glenn Fowler wrote: > > > > Don should know that there is no POSIX violation. He did not prove his claim > > > > with a pointer to the POSIX standard, judge yourself whom to believe..... > > > > > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xcu/tar.html > > > > > > It says nothing about (mis)interpreting an absolute path name as a > > > relative one, or about switching that behavior on or off. > > > Correct, it does not forbid the behavor that has been chosen to make tar more > > safe. > > apologies for posting to a closed case > but I can't let this one go > an application does not have carte blanche to do operation X simply > because the standard does not forbid operation X The POSIX standard intends to offer a complete description of the intended behavior of a program. If you believe that a description is missing, feel free file a defect report. > e.g., "it didn't say I couldn't kill(-1,9)" > > there are other complications > suppose the archive contains the symbolic link > /somedir/foo -> /dev/null Let me try to argue different... do the following: wget ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/star/testscripts/remove.tar echo > f1 tar xf remove.tar ls -l f1 If you do this with Sun tar, you get this: ls -l f1: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden star tvf remove.tar 0 Hrw-r--r-- root/berlios Jul 25 20:06 2003 f1 link to f1 Would you request this dangerous behavior to be mandatory just because it is undocumented by POSIX but "implemented" by traditional UNIX archivers? Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From al@logical-approach.com Thu Aug 16 09:07:00 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GG70AX021657 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:07:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GG4WlG021489; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:04:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00B4ZJBJEB00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:04:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV007LUJBIINE0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:04:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay23.sun.com (relay23.sun.com [192.12.251.54] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GG4Udd002589; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:04:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms23es.sun.com ([150.143.232.54] [150.143.232.54]) by relay23.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-599601; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:04:30 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.70]) by mms23es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1867752; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:04:30 +0000 (Z) Received: from logical.logical-approach.com ([207.168.117.16] [207.168.117.16]) by relay24.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-8969918; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:04:29 +0000 (Z) Received: from logical (logical [207.168.117.16]) by logical.logical-approach.com (8.13.5/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l7GG3tg5022725; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:03:55 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:03:55 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Hopper Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c47359.I6kWzW84KcR+MBPM%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: james.d.carlson@sun.com, gsf@research.att.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161543.l7GFhVQE024086@penguin.research.att.com> <46c47359.I6kWzW84KcR+MBPM%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 1901 On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Glenn Fowler wrote: > >>>>> Don should know that there is no POSIX violation. He did not prove his claim >>>>> with a pointer to the POSIX standard, judge yourself whom to believe..... >>>> >>>> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xcu/tar.html >>>> >>>> It says nothing about (mis)interpreting an absolute path name as a >>>> relative one, or about switching that behavior on or off. >> >>> Correct, it does not forbid the behavor that has been chosen to make tar more >>> safe. >> >> apologies for posting to a closed case >> but I can't let this one go >> an application does not have carte blanche to do operation X simply >> because the standard does not forbid operation X > > The POSIX standard intends to offer a complete description of the intended > behavior of a program. If you believe that a description is missing, feel > free file a defect report. > > > >> e.g., "it didn't say I couldn't kill(-1,9)" >> >> there are other complications >> suppose the archive contains the symbolic link >> /somedir/foo -> /dev/null > > Let me try to argue different... > > do the following: > > wget ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/star/testscripts/remove.tar > echo > f1 > tar xf remove.tar > ls -l f1 > > If you do this with Sun tar, you get this: > > ls -l > f1: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden > > star tvf remove.tar > 0 Hrw-r--r-- root/berlios Jul 25 20:06 2003 f1 link to f1 > > > Would you request this dangerous behavior to be mandatory just because it > is undocumented by POSIX but "implemented" by traditional UNIX archivers? Yes. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al@logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ From jek3@sun.com Thu Aug 16 09:53:58 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GGrwEk023349 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:53:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GGpUhw011771; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:51:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00D0JLHTBN00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:51:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00BRYLHSIU40@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:51:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.150.12.124] (vpn-129-150-12-124.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.12.124]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GGpRKF151292; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:51:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:48:32 -1000 From: Joseph Kowalski Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708160911.l7G9BLEA009964@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> To: Casper.Dik@sun.com Cc: Joerg Schilling , ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C47FE0.3000004@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708160911.l7G9BLEA009964@dm-holland-01.uk.sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060925) Status: RO Content-Length: 513 Casper.Dik@sun.com wrote: >> - Sun ignores the OpenSolaris community. >> > > No, it does not. PSARC listened to the arguments of both sides > but did not feel your arguments were compelling enough. > > (As explained in Joe's email) > Uh, I hope this isn't in "Joe's email". I didn't attend the meeting. What I said was post-review. I hope I only added information - mostly in bullet 3. I wasn't pushing for a different outcome. I just wanted to be sure that background facts were exposed. - jek3 From alan.coopersmith@sun.com Thu Aug 16 09:55:53 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GGtqcc023718 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:55:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GGrQ4n006936 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:53:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00303LL2NY00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:53:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.145.154.35]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV002JULL2Y810@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:53:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.101] (vpn-129-150-19-34.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.19.34]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GGrKxQ015738; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:52:02 -0700 From: Alan Coopersmith Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: Richard.Matthews@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, James.D.Carlson@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C480B2.1010703@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18115.16558.780180.399578@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c37ac0.agR6JG6IlcHmH/3d%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C3840B.3060303@Sun.COM> <46c437bb.HwCF0Qgi8byopFWr%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060602) Status: RO Content-Length: 841 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Bote that this would also boycott the chance to replace Closed Source in Solaris > by OpenSource. Boycotting this kind of integration means boycotting the spirit > of an OpenSolaris project. No - at worse, it means blocking the replacement of closed source with one of the several available open source implementations - it does nothing to block other existing open source implementations or even a new one not yet written. star is not the only open source tar that has ever been written or ever will be. (And as explained by others already, this doesn't even block a version of tar based on star from being used, as long as it maintained Sun tar compatibility when installed in /usr/bin/tar.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering From alan.coopersmith@sun.com Thu Aug 16 09:59:41 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GGxe7o023804 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:59:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GGv4qF013006 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:57:13 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00D0BLRCJF00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:57:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.145.154.35]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00BXILRCIS40@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:57:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.101] (vpn-129-150-19-34.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.19.34]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GGv6be017644; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:57:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:55:48 -0700 From: Alan Coopersmith Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: Casper.Dik@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C48194.4060805@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060602) Status: RO Content-Length: 640 Joerg Schilling wrote: > If we aggree that you provide documentation and that none of the sun tar > enhancement that has been introduced after June 16th 2004 (using deprecated > methods) needs to be supported but only the functionality needs to be present, > this wouls be easy to achieve. That will not be agreed to - any replacement of tar must support all enhancements that were made to Solaris tar up until the time of replacement. We can't tell users to throw away all the tar files they have from the last 3 years. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering From alan.coopersmith@sun.com Thu Aug 16 10:10:24 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GHAN2R024462 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:10:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GH7cQ6022409 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 01:07:56 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00E0DM972100@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:07:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.145.154.35]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00BRYM97IY60@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:07:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.101] (vpn-129-150-19-34.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.19.34]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GH7os9023945; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:07:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:06:32 -0700 From: Alan Coopersmith Subject: Re: [ogb-discuss] CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C48418.5040702@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060602) Status: RO Content-Length: 1339 I see you've cc'ed ogb-discuss - I assume that means you think this is an OGB matter somehow, but I'm not sure there's anything for the OGB to do. Joerg Schilling wrote: > - The ARC commitee needs to be changed or OpenSolaris will die! > If there is not a single non-Sun person from the OpenSolaris > community that is allowed to at least veto decisions, the ARC > decicions do not have the basis that is needed for OpenSolaris. No one person has the power to veto decisions - all ARC members get a single vote, and all ARC members can be outvoted by the rest. While it is well agreed that OpenSolaris community members should join the ARC, only one non-Sun person has ever volunteered to do so (and he then went and got a contract at Sun, spoiling the example). The biggest reason you do not have a vote at ARC is that you have not tried to join the ARC. If the OpenSolaris ARC unfairly denies membership to non-Sun people who apply, then the OGB should get involved - but if no one is interested, all we can do is encourage the ARC to try recruiting harder for non-Sun members. (Which would be a good thing, but John Plocher is out of the office right now, so we can't poke him about it until he gets back.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering From jek3@sun.com Thu Aug 16 10:12:35 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GHCYIf024527 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:12:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GHA3wO023684; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 01:10:04 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00E0VMCS4O00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00BHRMCQIQ50@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:10:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.150.12.124] (vpn-129-150-12-124.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.12.124]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GHA1PX162102; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:10:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:07:06 -1000 From: Joseph Kowalski Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c43ea9.bphBGXudJFoXGqZD%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: don.cragun@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C4843A.6020703@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <46c43ea9.bphBGXudJFoXGqZD%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060925) Status: RO Content-Length: 3629 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Joseph Kowalski wrote: > > >> 1) Any references about a star option "introduced in 1994" is >> irrelevant. In 1994, star was just one of hundreds (thousands) >> of FOSS programs. Sun/Solaris/PSARC can't track or >> mediate random FOSS programs. >> > > You are referring to a typo, it should read 1985. > And this is significant how? Its before 2004/480. That's all that matters. >> 2) On June 16th 2004 when PSARC 2004/480 was approved, star >> became relevant. This is only an approval for "sfw" integration. >> This doesn't make it a hard rule that star/tar should share option >> flags, but the project team should investigate this, expose the >> issue (if there is one) to PSARC and decide their proposed path. >> PSARC can "yea" or "nea" this. >> > > From 2004/480: > > Anticipated future changes: > - usr/src/cmd/cpio modified to link with librmt > - usr/src/cmd/mt modified to link with librmt > - either usr/src/cmd/tar modified to link with librmt, or star > augmented to be a full replacement for the existing Solaris > tar. If the latter is done, usr/src/cmd/tar would be > removed from ON and the binary replaced with a symlink > to the star executable. At that time, star and ustar may > also move from /usr/sfw/sbin to /usr/sbin. > Good stuff. We (you and I) agree about the "Anticipated future changes". I think we also agree (I hope), that these anticipations should have been considered. (Maybe they were.) "Anticipated future changes" **do not** give future projects (as in new versions of current project) a "free pass". >> 3) I believe several people have started to work with Joerg on an >> additional fast-track (for star) with a dependency on 2004/480. >> (Hence, only a review of "goodies" Joerg has added since that >> time.) I know Basabi spent some time with this. >> >> Since Basabi was busy, I tried to help. I was unable to get Jeorg >> to produce a proposal I was comfortable with. This was mostly >> about "getting the words right", rather than any serious contentions >> about the content. I think Joerg might have assumed I would >> write it, rather than edit it - not sure. >> > > No, we did aggree on that there is no need to file a new ARC case. I am curently > working on the integration. > Oh sigh... I'll send the mail messages to you. I'm glad to see that I have no additional work to do on this. >> 4) The fact that 2004/480 wasn't integrated is also (mostly) >> irrelevant. The architecture was approved. If some other >> project team finds that "it was in the way", then some PSARC >> approved remedy would result. (We need not discuss how >> this would be done.) >> > > If Dworkin Muller did not leave Sun, the integration would have been done > already. > Yes. If a cement truck hit you, it also would have been done. >> 5) The fact that 2004/480 specified /usr/sfw/bin/star is relevant. >> That is a reflection of importance of "flag compatibility" (or >> non-importance). >> > > Given the fact that Sun recently decided to prefer to use /usr/bin for > this kind of programs, I see no relevence of the path that has been > mentioned in 2004/480. > HUH? All of the programs being moved from /usr/sfw/bin to /usr/bin have been subject to ARC review. Moreover, this is one of the changes we discussed for an additional case. > Jörg > - jek3 From Garrett.Damore@sun.com Thu Aug 16 10:14:02 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GHE2id024546 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:14:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GHBYjX012093; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:11:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00E0TMFAAK00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00B7HMF9IY70@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GHBXuu023326; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:11:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JMV00501MADEJ00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:11:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.21] ([76.174.83.55]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMV00KPUMF9Q840@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:11:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:07:32 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c42fe8.EJnBTMPf0dKTXOFZ%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, lists@mcintyreweb.com, James.D.Carlson@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <1187284052.909.238.camel@zippy> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <1187217939.909.211.camel@zippy> <46c42fe8.EJnBTMPf0dKTXOFZ%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 1633 On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 13:07 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Garrett D'Amore" wrote: > > > Mostly I've avoided this conversation, but I want to inject two cents > > here. > > > > First, I'm sorry that Joerg feels that his effort is intentionally being > > stepped on. I really don't think that is what is being done here. > > There are several different implementations, and they have evolved in > > incompatible ways.... > > It seems that you did not yet understand the background. > Give me a phone call and I will explain you the problem. Am I incorrect in my understanding that you're upset because the introduction of -/ conflicts with what you had previously used -/ for in your implementation of suntar.c (in star)? I've seen enough mail from you that I think you're misunderstanding what Interface Stability means. Sun, Solaris, and OpenSolaris have *no* commitment to interface stability of unbundled programs. Star is currently unbundled/3rd party. The interface stability rules *only* apply to backwards compatibility of programs that Sun has already shipped. E.g., new versions of /usr/bin/tar need to be backwards compatible with old versions of /usr/bin/tar (as shipped on Solaris). In any case, the committee decision was reached, and notably there were no real objections, although during the meeting your concerns were noted. (But, weighing the considerations of the various needs, it was decided that your concerns did not warrant derailing the case.) I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in saying that I don't really want to burn any more cycles on this. -- Garrett > > Jörg > From Garrett.Damore@sun.com Thu Aug 16 10:22:13 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GHMD0R024649 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GHJZ8O019603; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:19:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00N0DMST4F00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:19:41 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00F2BMSSCQ80@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:19:41 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GHJeLH024318; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:19:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JMV00C01MLAT700@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:19:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.21] ([76.174.83.55]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMV00KUZMSDQ870@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:19:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:15:24 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: Darren J Moffat Cc: Joerg Schilling , Casper.Dik@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <1187284524.909.241.camel@zippy> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.2 Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 772 On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 13:55 +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Please try ti inform yourself on the star prject. Let us continue the > > discussion after you did prove that you did understand the work that has > > already been don for this ans how it has been done. > > Please do us the same courtesy and get informed on how the ARC process > works - it is documented in the arc community on opensolaris.org. This > case was approved and is now closed. Please stop the discussion of it here. > Furthermore, I'll point that it was noted that Joerg was *not* on the open call at the meeting yesterday. Joerg, you had the opportunity to raise your objections during that concall. The agenda was sent out and is fairly public. -- Garrett From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Thu Aug 16 10:23:07 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GHN7Ng024715 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:23:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GHKJ5Z021051; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:20:36 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00LK4MUC3J00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:20:36 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00FNMMSICO80@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:19:31 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay18i.sun.com (ip128.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.128]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GHJUOg027373; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:19:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp13es.sun.com ([160.41.209.23] [160.41.209.23]) by relay18i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-812442; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:19:30 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay17i.sun.com (relay17i.sun.com [129.179.4.127]) by mmp13es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-415414; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:19:29 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.23] [153.96.1.23]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3035283; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:19:29 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GHJQqc004329; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:19:26 +0200 (MEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw11.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7GHJP9g004294 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:19:26 +0200 (MEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7GHJPhi001544; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:19:25 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:19:25 +0200 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:16:22 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: [ogb-discuss] CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C48418.5040702@sun.com> To: alan.coopersmith@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c48666.q3/xkoTrB2V1NfHj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C48418.5040702@sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2007 17:19:25.0254 (UTC) FILETIME=[980BCE60:01C7E029] Status: RO Content-Length: 545 Alan Coopersmith wrote: > The biggest reason you do not have a vote at ARC is that you have not > tried to join the ARC. If the OpenSolaris ARC unfairly denies This is an interesting information! How should I do? Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Garrett.Damore@sun.com Thu Aug 16 10:27:50 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GHRnp9024815 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:27:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GHPL8S022399; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:25:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV0000RN2AAW00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:25:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00FKIN29CT80@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:25:21 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GHPLr0005948; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:25:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JMV00G01MS8LI00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:25:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.21] ([76.174.83.55]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMV00K9NN25Q8B0@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:18:31 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: [ogb-discuss] CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C48418.5040702@sun.com> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: Alan Coopersmith Cc: Joerg Schilling , ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <1187284711.909.243.camel@zippy> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.2 Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C48418.5040702@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 970 On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 10:06 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > I see you've cc'ed ogb-discuss - I assume that means you think this is > an OGB matter somehow, but I'm not sure there's anything for the OGB to do. > > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > - The ARC commitee needs to be changed or OpenSolaris will die! > > If there is not a single non-Sun person from the OpenSolaris > > community that is allowed to at least veto decisions, the ARC > > decicions do not have the basis that is needed for OpenSolaris. > > No one person has the power to veto decisions - all ARC members get a > single vote, and all ARC members can be outvoted by the rest. While > it is well agreed that OpenSolaris community members should join the > ARC, only one non-Sun person has ever volunteered to do so (and he > then went and got a contract at Sun, spoiling the example). And then he went and converted to a full-time employee. :-) Or rather will do so very soon. :-) -- Garrett From Garrett.Damore@sun.com Thu Aug 16 10:32:57 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GHWvNL024907 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:32:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GHUGnD024958; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:30:28 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00045NARKX00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:30:27 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.133]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00FQMNAPCQ80@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:30:25 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GHUPTQ006679; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JMV00G01MS8LI00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.21] ([76.174.83.55]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMV00KWQNAOQ8D0@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:26:24 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: [ogb-discuss] CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c48666.q3/xkoTrB2V1NfHj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: Alan.Coopersmith@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <1187285184.909.248.camel@zippy> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C48418.5040702@sun.com> <46c48666.q3/xkoTrB2V1NfHj%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 595 On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 19:16 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > > The biggest reason you do not have a vote at ARC is that you have not > > tried to join the ARC. If the OpenSolaris ARC unfairly denies > > This is an interesting information! > > How should I do? To be an ARC intern, you need to send a request to the PSARC chair. Right now that is Kais. If you plan on working on ARC on Sun time, you might need your manager's approval. (Normally not too big an issue... but it can take ~15% of your time.) -- Garrett > > Jörg > From Keith.Wesolowski@sun.com Thu Aug 16 10:50:37 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GHobTd025483 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:50:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GHlsnX014823; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:47:54 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00801O497300@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:48:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV0029OO49Y8B0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:48:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GHm8lW209932 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:48:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from wesolows@localhost) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7GHm817209931; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:48:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:48:08 -0700 From: Keith M Wesolowski Subject: Re: [ogb-discuss] CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18116.13639.266698.62651@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: James Carlson Cc: Joerg Schilling , psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <20070816174808.GB153960@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c41096.SnYisQ6Y9GR2X2Vh%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.13639.266698.62651@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Status: RO Content-Length: 2374 On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 07:30:15AM -0400, James Carlson wrote: > There is as yet no appeals path for ARC decisions that involves the > OpenSolaris community. There certainly should be, and the path should > go to a community group and then (if unresolved) up to the OGB. As > was done the first time an appeal was needed inside Sun, I suspect we > will likely end up designing this process when we need it. > > However, despite your email address, you're a Sun contractor. You do > have a defined appeals process available to you. That is to convince > a DE or Director to support an appeal to SAC (ARC chairs). While that's true, it's not apparent (to me, at least) that the result of such an appeal is binding on anything other than Solaris (more properly, Sun products). That is, a successful appeal to SAC could result in permission to make a change to a Solaris consolidation but not an OpenSolaris one. I suppose that if the chairs of ARCs which are not open to non-Sun membership abstained from participating, it would then be reasonable for us to accept their decision. If that's what we want to do, we should formalise that policy. Alternately, the OGB might, upon a separate appeal, consider the SAC or other Sun-specific decision on something like an amicus curiae or foreign precedent (depending on who submits it) basis. In any event, while Joerg is welcome to appeal to the OGB, I'm not interested in overruling the ARC on technical grounds, nor do I think we should grant exceptions (Jim's case 3). One of the great things about OpenSolaris is that it frees us from meddling managers and pressured project teams who want to do the wrong thing because they've been handed some ill-conceived deadline or tasked with implementing an outright misfeature. Not only are the results technically unacceptable, this invariably ends up costing the company far more than whatever fleeting advantage we obtain. So it seems to me that everybody wins by disallowing these exceptions or at least severely penalising them by forcing Sun to fork in order to grant them. An appeal based on the ARC failing to consider all the information might be more acceptable, but I must say that the record in this case does not appear to support that conclusion. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!" From alan.coopersmith@sun.com Thu Aug 16 11:38:22 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GIcLRQ026411 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:38:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GIZhZX028322; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 02:35:47 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00C3HQBKBS00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:35:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic.eng.sun.com ([129.146.228.31]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00AI6QBJY410@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:35:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.108.211] (almas.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.211]) by jurassic.eng.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GIZgsu403804; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:35:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:35:41 -0700 From: Alan Coopersmith Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <1187284524.909.241.camel@zippy> To: "Garrett D'Amore" Cc: Darren J Moffat , Joerg Schilling , Casper.Dik@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C498FD.6050106@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.1 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> <1187284524.909.241.camel@zippy> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070605) Status: RO Content-Length: 910 Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Furthermore, I'll point that it was noted that Joerg was *not* on the > open call at the meeting yesterday. Joerg, you had the opportunity to > raise your objections during that concall. The agenda was sent out and > is fairly public. Though to be fair, yesterday's call was one of the ones set at reasonable times for the US & East Asia, but not Europe, where Joerg lives. Most PSARC calls are timed better for US & Europe participation, but leave Asia out - this meeting had a project team from Asia joining. (It was 4pm California, which would be 1am in Germany.) It's been well known for years that there is no one PSARC meeting time that can be attended by all interested parties, even when it was just people from Sun's engineering sites around the world. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering From don.cragun@sun.com Thu Aug 16 12:27:13 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GJRCAL027811 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:27:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GJOVU1016574; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:24:44 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00L09SL7PG00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:24:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.146.226.64]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00L20SL7E810@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:24:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.64]) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6) with SMTP id l7GJHDxw009983; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:17:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:17:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Cragun Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Cc: ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, PSARC-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Reply-to: Don Cragun Message-id: <200708161917.l7GJHDxw009983@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.5.5 SunOS 5.9 sun4u sparc Content-type: TEXT/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-MD5: eSq9NV+7zjAjpW4wMhwfEg== X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by sac.sfbay.sun.com id l7GJRCAL027811 Status: RO Content-Length: 11599 >Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:35:47 +0200 >From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) >Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] > >Don Cragun wrote: > >> >Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:50:25 +0200 >> >From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) >> > >> ... ... ... >> > >> >If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1), >> >cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the -/ >> >option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: >> > >> > -/ Don't strip leading slashes from file names when >> > extracting an archive. Tar archives containing abso- >> > lute pathnames are usually a bad idea. With other tar >> > implementations, they may possibly never be extracted >> > without clobbering existing files. Star for that rea- >> > son, by default strips leading slashes from filenames >> > when in extract mode. As it may be impossible to >> > create an archive where leading slashes have been >> > stripped while retaining correct path names, star does >> > not strip leading slashes in create mode. >> >> Jörg, >> The only way these four cases (PSARC/2007/459 [cpio, pax, & >> tar], 423 [compress, cp, pack, uncompress, & unpack], 410 [chmod], and >> 394 [ls]) create any incompatibility with star is if star is intended >> to replace cpio, pax, or tar. When you chose to add -/ to star, you >> guaranteed that star could NEVER replace tar, cpio, or pax in /usr/bin > >This is if course incorrect: When _you_ chose to add -/ to Sun's current >tar/cpio/pax implementation, you plan to boycott a possible future integration >of an star based implemention to replace the old Sun programs. This is because >_you_ chose to deliberately add an incompatible interface. > >> (which supply behavior conforming to SVID3, XPG3, XPG4, SUS, SUSv2, >> SUSv3 and all of the POSIX standards). Stripping leading slashes from >> absolute pathnames (by default) as files are extracted from archives >> violates standards requirements for all of these utilities. > >This is a hazardous claim. I know of no part of the POSIX standard that >prevents tar/cpio/pax from implementing a security aware behavior by default. >It seems that you also know this - otherwise you could give a pointer that >proves your claim. As we all know, the POSIX standards never described the behavior of the tar and cpio utilities; they only specify the cpio c_magic=="070707" (pax -x cpio, Sun cpio -H odc, and Sun cpio -[io] -c) and tar ustar (pax -x ustar and Sun tar without the E and @ function modifiers) archive formats. The descriptions of cpio in SVID3 (Volume V, pages 8-2 through 8-4), XPG3 (Volume 1, pages 74 through 76), XPG4 (Commands and Utilities Volume, pages 219-222), SUS (Commands and Utilities Volume, pages 219 through 222), SUSv2 (Commands and Utilities Volume, pages 226-229) all say essentially the same thing (the following quote is from SUSv2) in the description of the -i option: "(Copy in.) Extract files from the standard input, which is assumed to be the product of a previous cpio -o. Only files with names that match patterns are selected. The extracted files are conditionally created and copied into the current directory tree based on the options described below. The permissions of the files will be those of the previous cpio -o. The owner and group of the files will be that of the current user unless the user has appropriate privileges, which causes cpio to retain the owner and group of the files of the previous cpio -o. If the archive being read does not match the modifier specified**1, cpio may consider this an error and exit or may recognise the archive and continue processing. Only a user with appropriate privileges can extract block special or character special files from an archive." **1 This refers to the presence or absence of the c modifier which specifies whether or not character mode headers (as defined by POSIX) or binary mode headers are used. SVID3 specifies -H odc, -H crc, -H tar, and -H ustar formats as well as the -c option. Nothing in the description of cpio nor any of its options or option modifiers in these standards allow cpio to arbitrarily change the pathname of a file being extracted from an archive. Sun's cpio does add a -r option allowing files to be interactively renamed as they are extracted. I won't quote the references for tar in SVID3, XPG3, XPG4, SUS, or SUSv2, but the requirements for arbitrarily renaming files on extraction are the same (i.e., it is not allowed unless you add an option that enables renaming or define a new archive format that makes all absolute pathnames relative to the CWD). For the pax utility, POSIX.2-1992, XPG4, SUS, SUSv2, and SUSv3/POSIX.1-2001 the requirements are (quotes from SUSv3/POSIX.1-2001 with corrigenda 1 and 2 applied): XCU6, P698, L26888-26893 (first part of pax utility description of read mode): "In read mode (when -r is specified, but -w is not), pax shall extract the members of the archive file read from the standard input, with pathnames matching the specified patterns. If an extracted file is of type directory, the file hierarchy rooted at that file shall be extracted as well. The extracted files shall be created performing pathname resolution with the directory in which pax was invoked as the current working directory." XBD6, P100, L3136-3142 (second paragraph of the description of the General Concept "Pathname Resolution"): "Each filename in the pathname is located in the directory specified by its predecessor (for example, in the pathname fragment a/b, file b is located in directory a). Pathname resolution shall fail if this cannot be accomplished. If the pathname begins with a slash, the predecessor of the first filename shall be taken to be the root directory of the process (such pathnames are referred to as ``absolute pathnames''). If the pathname does not begin with a slash, the predecessor of the first filename of the pathname shall be taken to be the current working directory of the process (such pathnames are referred to as ``relative pathnames'')." So the standards clearly require that absolute pathnames extracted from archives by pax have / as their parent directory; not the current directory unless you use an option that changes this default behavior. The standard provides an option that mimics star's default behavior. When extracting files from an archive, three ways to specify it would be: pax -r -s ",^/,," -x cpio < cpio_archive pax -r -s "/^\///" -x pax < pax_archive pax -r -s "x^/xx" -x ustar < ustar_archive > >In fact, the behavior of the current Sun implementaions for tar/cpio/pax >allow people to easily attack the integrity of Solaris installation by adding >simple hand-crafted changes into tar or cpio archives that are going to be >unpacked by the administrator with sufficient privileges. If an administrator copies files onto his or her system without verifying what files are being copied, the underlying system will always be vulnerable. > >Star and it's different CLI implementations just care anbout vulnerability >issues from hand crafted archives or archives that have been created in a >problematic way by accident, the current Sun implementations of the same >programs ignore this problem. The current Sun implementations adhere to the standards. If you believe this is a serious security flaw in pax, you should file an interpretation request to The Austin Group and suggest changes that need to be made to the standard to avoid the issue. If you want a fix for this to get into the next revision of the standard, you have until the end of this month to file the interpretation request. > > >> Since star cannot replace tar, cpio, or pax without changing >> the default behavior of star and the meaning of the -/ option as it has >> been defined by star for the last 13 years, I see no reason why -% and >> -/ cannot behave as described in these four PSARC cases without causing >> any incompatibilities to the existing star nor to possible future star >> enhancements described in PSARC/2004/480. > >This is of course incorrect. Pleae inform yourself about the star project before >trying to judge. The optins -/ and -.. are _needed_ in star's CLI emulations >for the Sun programs in case that someone needs to switch off the "security >by default" behavior. If Sun did introduce the incompatible meaning of -/, >either integration of star based implementaions would be boycotted or these >programs would need to become unstable just from the will of the Sun PSARC >commitee. I don't need to inform myself anymore about the star project. The fact that star violates the standard by modifying the pathnames of extracted files means that star can't be renamed /usr/bin/tar and maintain standards conformance. If you would have reversed the meaning of -/ when you created it (i.e., -/ would cause absolute pathnames to be treated as relative and would ignore any pathnames that used .. to get above the CWD when extracting files from an archive), it would have made sense for the project teams to hunt for a different option letter. Since star ignored the standards when -/ was added and changed the default behavior to be something that does not conform to the standards, compatibility with star's definition of -/ didn't seem important to either of the project teams that filed the four cases in question. > >Going OpenSource with Solaris and trying to benefit from other OpenSource >Software cannot be seen for serious in case that Sun claims that interface >stability is important but at the same time ignores interface stability. >If you like to retain interface stability, you need to follow the following >rules: > >- Interfaces need to be defined in a way that allows them to be stable > for a long time. This is true for star. > >- If there are possible conflicts with newer programs (like the current > Sun implementations for tar/cpio/pax) the only way to retain interface > stability is to use the "first come first serve" rule. > > The Option -/ has already been in use by star for a long time > _and_ you have been warned about the problem _before_ you started > to introduce incompatibility. > > If you introduce -/ for Sun's tar/cpio/pax, you try to prevent other > software (with older rights) from retaining CLI long term stability. > >Now, please do your homework.... I have done my homework. You have called me a liar and you have said I don't know the standards. Please do your homework and quote text in any of the standards I mentioned above that allow cpio, pax, and tar to arbitrarily change the pathnames of files being extracted from archives. Sincerely, Donald W. Cragun Chair of the IEEE PASC Shell and Utilities Working Group Member of the IEEE PASC Sponsor Executive Committee IEEE PASC's Organizational Representative to The Austin Group Sun's primary representative to The Open Group's Base Working Group > >Jörg > >-- > EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin > js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) > schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ > URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From gsf@research.att.com Thu Aug 16 13:50:20 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GKoK4V029088 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:50:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GKlqH9011435; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00C0LWFS5800@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:47:52 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV007OBWFRAT60@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:47:51 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (ip125.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.125]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GKktVe015091; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:47:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp13es.sun.com ([160.41.209.23] [160.41.209.23]) by relay15i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-758307; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:47:50 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay17i.sun.com (relay17i.sun.com [129.179.4.127]) by mmp13es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-531580; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:47:50 +0000 (Z) Received: from mail-red.research.att.com ([192.20.225.110] [192.20.225.110]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3947774; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:47:50 +0000 (Z) Received: from penguin.research.att.com (penguin.research.att.com [135.207.20.192]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217818583; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:47:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from gsf@localhost) by penguin.research.att.com (8.13.1/8.12.10/Submit) id l7GKldnn013088; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:47:39 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:47:39 -0400 From: Glenn Fowler Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: don.cragun@sun.com, Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Cc: Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <200708162047.l7GKldnn013088@penguin.research.att.com> Organization: AT&T Research MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: mailx (AT&T/BSD) 9.9 2006-04-17 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708161917.l7GJHDxw009983@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 939 On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:17:13 -0700 (PDT) Don Cragun wrote: > When extracting files from an archive, three ways to specify it would > be: > pax -r -s ",^/,," -x cpio < cpio_archive > pax -r -s "/^\///" -x pax < pax_archive > pax -r -s "x^/xx" -x ustar < ustar_archive one minor nit, "The archive formats described in the EXTENDED DESCRIPTION section shall be automatically detected on input." so the ``-x format'' are not needed -- -x is actually not listed for the -r mode, at least at http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/toc.htm so this would suffice pax -r -s ",^/,," < any_archive_the_implementation_groks I believe with ``-r -x format'' an implementation may treat input archive mismatch as an error, but this is not explicitly stated in the standard (this *may* be the only spot in the standard where I have a chance of knowing something Don doesn't) -- Glenn Fowler -- AT&T Research, Florham Park NJ -- From Calum.Mackay@sun.com Thu Aug 16 14:19:04 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GLJ3bM029955 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:19:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GLGLYo009699; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:16:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00D0PXROQ400@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:16:36 -0600 (MDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.5]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV007JJXRLB080@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:16:35 -0600 (MDT) Received: from d1-emea-09.sun.com (d1-emea-09.sun.com [192.18.2.119]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GLGX6c029234; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:16:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-09.sun.com by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMV00A01XP04O00@d1-emea-09.sun.com> (original mail from Calum.Mackay@Sun.COM); Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:16:33 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.254.1] ([62.24.230.83]) by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMV004KUXRFWOMQ@d1-emea-09.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:16:32 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:16:22 +0100 From: Calum Mackay Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C498FD.6050106@sun.com> Sender: Calum.Mackay@sun.com To: Alan Coopersmith Cc: "Garrett D'Amore" , Darren J Moffat , Joerg Schilling , Casper.Dik@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C4BEA6.8050508@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> <1187284524.909.241.camel@zippy> <46C498FD.6050106@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 3.0a1pre (X11/2007081607) Status: RO Content-Length: 191 Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Though to be fair, yesterday's call was one of the ones set at > reasonable times for the US & East Asia, but not Europe, Some of us still managed it. cheers, c. From stevel@sun.com Thu Aug 16 14:31:12 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GLVBo0000332 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:31:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GLSds6020910; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:28:41 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV0040TYBS7Z00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.59]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV00LQMYBQE8D0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:28:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.228.82] (donuthole.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.228.82]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7GLSbKA274341; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:28:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:29:33 -0700 From: Stephen Lau Subject: Re: [ogb-discuss] CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708162047.l7GKldnn013088@penguin.research.att.com> To: Glenn Fowler Cc: don.cragun@sun.com, Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <46C4C1BD.4030702@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708161917.l7GJHDxw009983@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <200708162047.l7GKldnn013088@penguin.research.att.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070723) Status: RO Content-Length: 1348 Glenn Fowler wrote: > On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:17:13 -0700 (PDT) Don Cragun wrote: >> When extracting files from an archive, three ways to specify it would >> be: >> pax -r -s ",^/,," -x cpio < cpio_archive >> pax -r -s "/^\///" -x pax < pax_archive >> pax -r -s "x^/xx" -x ustar < ustar_archive > > one minor nit, > "The archive formats described in the EXTENDED DESCRIPTION > section shall be automatically detected on input." > so the ``-x format'' are not needed -- -x is actually not listed for the -r mode, > at least at http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/toc.htm > so this would suffice > > pax -r -s ",^/,," < any_archive_the_implementation_groks > > I believe with ``-r -x format'' an implementation may treat input archive > mismatch as an error, but this is not explicitly stated in the standard > > (this *may* be the only spot in the standard where I have a chance of > knowing something Don doesn't) > > -- Glenn Fowler -- AT&T Research, Florham Park NJ -- > > _______________________________________________ > ogb-discuss mailing list > ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss Please take non governance issues off the OGB list. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // stevel@sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development From don.cragun@Sun.COM Thu Aug 16 14:39:59 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GLdwdi000520 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GLbWDa023360; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:37:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00301YQHU300@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:37:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.146.226.64]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV0025IYQH1860@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:37:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.226.64]) by spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6) with SMTP id l7GLMUJv010105; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:22:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:22:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Cragun Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] To: gsf@research.att.com Cc: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM, ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, PSARC-ext@Sun.COM Reply-to: Don Cragun Message-id: <200708162122.l7GLMUJv010105@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: dtmail 1.3.0 @(#)CDE Version 1.5.5 SunOS 5.9 sun4u sparc Content-type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-MD5: Yn9dbXSk0K1hEJcg/9l11g== X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 1608 >Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:47:39 -0400 >From: Glenn Fowler >Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] > >On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:17:13 -0700 (PDT) Don Cragun wrote: >> When extracting files from an archive, three ways to specify it would >> be: >> pax -r -s ",^/,," -x cpio < cpio_archive >> pax -r -s "/^\///" -x pax < pax_archive >> pax -r -s "x^/xx" -x ustar < ustar_archive > >one minor nit, > "The archive formats described in the EXTENDED DESCRIPTION > section shall be automatically detected on input." >so the ``-x format'' are not needed -- -x is actually not listed for the -r mode, >at least at http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/toc.htm >so this would suffice > > pax -r -s ",^/,," < any_archive_the_implementation_groks > >I believe with ``-r -x format'' an implementation may treat input archive >mismatch as an error, but this is not explicitly stated in the standard Glenn, Yes, you're correct. Allowing -x to be used with -r is an extension to the standard; I believe several implementations verify that the format specified by -x is actually the format found on stdin when both are used, but the standard is completely silent on what happens when both -r and -x are specified on the same command line. > >(this *may* be the only spot in the standard where I have a chance of > knowing something Don doesn't) I'm sure you know a lot more about some sections of the shell than I do as well... Cheers, Don > >-- Glenn Fowler -- AT&T Research, Florham Park NJ -- From al@logical-approach.com Thu Aug 16 14:54:26 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7GLsP2Q001041 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:54:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7GLpsls028223; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:51:55 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMV00F0HZEHRK00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:51:53 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMV007PSZEFB0A0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:51:52 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay18i.sun.com (ip128.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.128]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7GLpptq024178; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:51:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp13es.sun.com ([160.41.209.23] [160.41.209.23]) by relay18i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-824359; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:51:51 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay16i.sun.com (relay16i.sun.com [129.179.4.126]) by mmp13es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-565215; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:51:50 +0000 (Z) Received: from logical.logical-approach.com ([207.168.117.16] [207.168.117.16]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3034084; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 21:51:49 +0000 (Z) Received: from logical (logical [207.168.117.16]) by logical.logical-approach.com (8.13.5/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l7GLpcQX013981; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:51:38 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:51:38 -0500 (CDT) From: Al Hopper Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708161917.l7GJHDxw009983@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> To: Don Cragun Cc: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de, PSARC-ext@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Boundary_(ID_bhhDHiMbD0TgJRDTc/e9cg)" X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708161917.l7GJHDxw009983@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 13573 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --Boundary_(ID_bhhDHiMbD0TgJRDTc/e9cg) Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Don Cragun wrote: >> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:35:47 +0200 >> From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) >> Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) > [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] >> >> Don Cragun wrote: >> >>>> Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 19:50:25 +0200 >>>> From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) >>>> >>> ... ... ... >>>> >>>> If interface stability is really important for OpenSolaris, then tar(1= ), >>>> cpio(1) and pax(1) cannot implement an incomatible way of handling the= -/ >>>> option. The option -/ (introduced in 1994) has the following meaning: >>>> >>>> -/ Don't strip leading slashes from file names when >>>> extracting an archive. Tar archives containing abso- >>>> lute pathnames are usually a bad idea. With other tar >>>> implementations, they may possibly never be extracted >>>> without clobbering existing files. Star for that rea- >>>> son, by default strips leading slashes from filenames >>>> when in extract mode. As it may be impossible to >>>> create an archive where leading slashes have been >>>> stripped while retaining correct path names, star does >>>> not strip leading slashes in create mode. >>> >>> J=F6rg, >>> =09The only way these four cases (PSARC/2007/459 [cpio, pax, & >>> tar], 423 [compress, cp, pack, uncompress, & unpack], 410 [chmod], and >>> 394 [ls]) create any incompatibility with star is if star is intended >>> to replace cpio, pax, or tar. When you chose to add -/ to star, you >>> guaranteed that star could NEVER replace tar, cpio, or pax in /usr/bin >> >> This is if course incorrect: When _you_ chose to add -/ to Sun's current >> tar/cpio/pax implementation, you plan to boycott a possible future integ= ration >> of an star based implemention to replace the old Sun programs. This is b= ecause >> _you_ chose to deliberately add an incompatible interface. >> >>> (which supply behavior conforming to SVID3, XPG3, XPG4, SUS, SUSv2, >>> SUSv3 and all of the POSIX standards). Stripping leading slashes from >>> absolute pathnames (by default) as files are extracted from archives >>> violates standards requirements for all of these utilities. >> >> This is a hazardous claim. I know of no part of the POSIX standard that >> prevents tar/cpio/pax from implementing a security aware behavior by def= ault. >> It seems that you also know this - otherwise you could give a pointer th= at >> proves your claim. > > As we all know, the POSIX standards never described the behavior of the > tar and cpio utilities; they only specify the cpio c_magic=3D=3D"070707" > (pax -x cpio, Sun cpio -H odc, and Sun cpio -[io] -c) and tar ustar > (pax -x ustar and Sun tar without the E and @ function modifiers) > archive formats. > > The descriptions of cpio in SVID3 (Volume V, pages 8-2 through 8-4), > XPG3 (Volume 1, pages 74 through 76), XPG4 (Commands and Utilities > Volume, pages 219-222), SUS (Commands and Utilities Volume, pages 219 > through 222), SUSv2 (Commands and Utilities Volume, pages 226-229) all > say essentially the same thing (the following quote is from SUSv2) in > the description of the -i option: > "(Copy in.) Extract files from the standard input, which is > =09assumed to be the product of a previous cpio -o. Only files > =09with names that match patterns are selected. The extracted > =09files are conditionally created and copied into the current > =09directory tree based on the options described below. The > =09permissions of the files will be those of the previous cpio > =09-o. The owner and group of the files will be that of the > =09current user unless the user has appropriate privileges, which > =09causes cpio to retain the owner and group of the files of the > =09previous cpio -o. If the archive being read does not match the > =09modifier specified**1, cpio may consider this an error and exit > =09or may recognise the archive and continue processing. Only a > =09user with appropriate privileges can extract block special or > =09character special files from an archive." > **1 This refers to the presence or absence of the c modifier which > specifies whether or not character mode headers (as defined by > POSIX) or binary mode headers are used. SVID3 specifies -H odc, > -H crc, -H tar, and -H ustar formats as well as the -c option. > Nothing in the description of cpio nor any of its options or option > modifiers in these standards allow cpio to arbitrarily change the > pathname of a file being extracted from an archive. Sun's cpio does > add a -r option allowing files to be interactively renamed as they are > extracted. > > I won't quote the references for tar in SVID3, XPG3, XPG4, SUS, or > SUSv2, but the requirements for arbitrarily renaming files on > extraction are the same (i.e., it is not allowed unless you add an > option that enables renaming or define a new archive format that makes > all absolute pathnames relative to the CWD). > > For the pax utility, POSIX.2-1992, XPG4, SUS, SUSv2, and > SUSv3/POSIX.1-2001 the requirements are (quotes from SUSv3/POSIX.1-2001 > with corrigenda 1 and 2 applied): > =09XCU6, P698, L26888-26893 (first part of pax utility description > =09of read mode): > =09 "In read mode (when -r is specified, but -w is not), pax > =09=09shall extract the members of the archive file read from > =09=09the standard input, with pathnames matching the > =09=09specified patterns. If an extracted file is of type > =09=09directory, the file hierarchy rooted at that file shall > =09=09be extracted as well. The extracted files shall be > =09=09created performing pathname resolution with the > =09=09directory in which pax was invoked as the current > =09=09working directory." > > =09XBD6, P100, L3136-3142 (second paragraph of the description of > =09the General Concept "Pathname Resolution"): > =09 "Each filename in the pathname is located in the > =09=09directory specified by > =09=09its predecessor (for example, in the pathname fragment > =09=09a/b, file b is located in directory a). Pathname > =09=09resolution shall fail if this cannot be accomplished. > =09=09If the pathname begins with a slash, the predecessor of > =09=09the first filename shall be taken to be the root > =09=09directory of the process (such pathnames are referred > =09=09to as ``absolute pathnames''). If the pathname does > =09=09not begin with a slash, the predecessor of the first > =09=09filename of the pathname shall be taken to be the > =09=09current working directory of the process (such > =09=09pathnames are referred to as ``relative pathnames'')." > > So the standards clearly require that absolute pathnames extracted from > archives by pax have / as their parent directory; not the current > directory unless you use an option that changes this default behavior. > The standard provides an option that mimics star's default behavior. > When extracting files from an archive, three ways to specify it would > be: > =09=09pax -r -s ",^/,," -x cpio < cpio_archive > =09=09pax -r -s "/^\///" -x pax < pax_archive > =09=09pax -r -s "x^/xx" -x ustar < ustar_archive > >> >> In fact, the behavior of the current Sun implementaions for tar/cpio/pax >> allow people to easily attack the integrity of Solaris installation by a= dding >> simple hand-crafted changes into tar or cpio archives that are going to = be >> unpacked by the administrator with sufficient privileges. > > If an administrator copies files onto his or her system without > verifying what files are being copied, the underlying system will > always be vulnerable. > >> >> Star and it's different CLI implementations just care anbout vulnerabili= ty >> issues from hand crafted archives or archives that have been created in = a >> problematic way by accident, the current Sun implementations of the same >> programs ignore this problem. > > The current Sun implementations adhere to the standards. If you > believe this is a serious security flaw in pax, you should file an > interpretation request to The Austin Group and suggest changes that > need to be made to the standard to avoid the issue. If you want a fix > for this to get into the next revision of the standard, you have until > the end of this month to file the interpretation request. > >> >> >>> =09Since star cannot replace tar, cpio, or pax without changing >>> the default behavior of star and the meaning of the -/ option as it has >>> been defined by star for the last 13 years, I see no reason why -% and >>> -/ cannot behave as described in these four PSARC cases without causing >>> any incompatibilities to the existing star nor to possible future star >>> enhancements described in PSARC/2004/480. >> >> This is of course incorrect. Pleae inform yourself about the star projec= t > before >> trying to judge. The optins -/ and -.. are _needed_ in star's CLI emulat= ions >> for the Sun programs in case that someone needs to switch off the "secur= ity >> by default" behavior. If Sun did introduce the incompatible meaning of -= /, >> either integration of star based implementaions would be boycotted or th= ese >> programs would need to become unstable just from the will of the Sun PSA= RC >> commitee. > > I don't need to inform myself anymore about the star project. The fact > that star violates the standard by modifying the pathnames of extracted > files means that star can't be renamed /usr/bin/tar and maintain > standards conformance. If you would have reversed the meaning of -/ > when you created it (i.e., -/ would cause absolute pathnames to be > treated as relative and would ignore any pathnames that used .. to get > above the CWD when extracting files from an archive), it would have > made sense for the project teams to hunt for a different option > letter. Since star ignored the standards when -/ was added and changed > the default behavior to be something that does not conform to the > standards, compatibility with star's definition of -/ didn't seem > important to either of the project teams that filed the four cases in > question. > >> >> Going OpenSource with Solaris and trying to benefit from other OpenSourc= e >> Software cannot be seen for serious in case that Sun claims that interfa= ce >> stability is important but at the same time ignores interface stability. >> If you like to retain interface stability, you need to follow the follow= ing >> rules: >> >> -=09Interfaces need to be defined in a way that allows them to be stable >> =09for a long time. This is true for star. >> >> -=09If there are possible conflicts with newer programs (like the curren= t >> =09Sun implementations for tar/cpio/pax) the only way to retain interfac= e >> =09stability is to use the "first come first serve" rule. >> >> =09The Option -/ has already been in use by star for a long time >> =09_and_ you have been warned about the problem _before_ you started >> =09to introduce incompatibility. >> >> =09If you introduce -/ for Sun's tar/cpio/pax, you try to prevent other >> =09software (with older rights) from retaining CLI long term stability. >> >> Now, please do your homework.... > > I have done my homework. You have called me a liar and you have said I > don't know the standards. Please do your homework and quote text in [... ogb-discuss list removed .... ] Don - as far as I'm concerned, you are the "go-to person" when it=20 comes to standards related knowledge and interpretation, and we, as=20 OpenSolaris community participants, are lucky and grateful to be able=20 to tap into your extensive expertize. Your work on the ksh93=20 integration project has proven extremely helpful and your attitude is=20 always 100% professional. Please keep up the Good Work (TM). Anyone who suggests/implies otherwise if full of krap and lacks=20 credibility IMHO. > any of the standards I mentioned above that allow cpio, pax, and tar to > arbitrarily change the pathnames of files being extracted from archives. +1 Many Thanks Don. I know the above email took a lot more time to write=20 than it did to read! > =09Sincerely, > =09Donald W. Cragun > =09Chair of the IEEE PASC Shell and Utilities Working Group > =09Member of the IEEE PASC Sponsor Executive Committee > =09IEEE PASC's Organizational Representative to The Austin Group > =09Sun's primary representative to The Open Group's Base Working Group > >> >> J=F6rg >> >> -- >> EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J=F6rg Schilling D-13353 = Berlin >> js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) >> schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: > http://schily.blogspot.com/ >> URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/s= chily > > _______________________________________________ > opensolaris-arc mailing list > opensolaris-arc@opensolaris.org > Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. al@logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/= --Boundary_(ID_bhhDHiMbD0TgJRDTc/e9cg)-- From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Fri Aug 17 02:28:07 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7H9S608011024 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 02:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7H9PRjn001236; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:25:33 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMW00C1BVIGFT00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:25:28 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.98.43]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMW00BEQVIENEC0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:25:26 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay21.sun.com (relay21.sun.com [192.12.251.14] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7H9PPQa000107; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:25:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms23es.sun.com ([150.143.232.54] [150.143.232.54]) by relay21.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-675569; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:25:25 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.70]) by mms23es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-817371; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:25:25 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay24.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-9962302; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:25:24 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7H9OlgW013187; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:24:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7H9OknD013108 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:24:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7H9OkqQ029045; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:24:46 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:24:46 +0200 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:21:42 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: To: al@logical-approach.com Cc: PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, jek3@Sun.COM, James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM, gsf@research.att.com, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c568a6.yFrjkv4kDElyyFo9%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161543.l7GFhVQE024086@penguin.research.att.com> <46c47359.I6kWzW84KcR+MBPM%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2007 09:24:46.0499 (UTC) FILETIME=[73CC6730:01C7E0B0] Status: RO Content-Length: 2884 Al Hopper wrote: > > Let me try to argue different... > > > > do the following: > > > > wget ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/star/testscripts/remove.tar > > echo > f1 > > tar xf remove.tar > > ls -l f1 > > > > If you do this with Sun tar, you get this: > > > > ls -l > > f1: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden > > > > star tvf remove.tar > > 0 Hrw-r--r-- root/berlios Jul 25 20:06 2003 f1 link to f1 > > > > > > Would you request this dangerous behavior to be mandatory just because it > > is undocumented by POSIX but "implemented" by traditional UNIX archivers? > > Yes. A shortsighted response that gives the impression that you did not try to think about the problem first. The TAR archive, I was using as an example, cannot be created by accident on any known platform. You need to handcraft such an archive. If it exists, it only exists in order to demonstrate a vulnerability (the good guy case) or to attack a system based on this vulnerability (the bad guy case). Maybe you now understand why I did use this example... it was choosen in order to find out whether responses in this thread have a technical background or whether the replies seem to rather have a personal background. Today, there are numerous attacks and numerous ways for attacking systems. An OS platform is only safe against such attacks if it's creators are constantly looking for possible vulnerabilities and fix them before bad guys discover them. Not fixing a vulnerability in a userland utility may be a hint that the maintenance for the userland is neglected, or a hint for missing skills about how to use a combination of social engineering and technical problems for attacking systems. It is obvious that the development for userland tools in general, and development for archivers in special has been neglected for a while on Solaris. If it is not possible to discuss cases that are obviously _only_ a security problem, it would be hard to discuss corner cases like the ones that result from archives that include files with absolute path names. As I mentioned before, the POSIX standard does not forbid to by default disallowing the extraction of files that come with an absolute path name in the archive. Ignoring the resulting problems creates a serious vulnerability in the OS. For this reason, there is no way to discuss _whether_ to forbid such files by default. There is however room to discuss _how_ an archiver should handle the problem by default. If this was a technical based discussion, we did now discuss _how_ to handle the problem... Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Fri Aug 17 02:59:16 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7H9xFLP011435 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 02:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7H9uahf025328; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:56:43 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMW0030FWYHAD00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 02:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.43.22]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMW00ELUWYGDM70@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 02:56:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay22.sun.com (relay22.sun.com [192.12.251.34] (may be forged)) by sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7H9uegR006855; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:56:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms24es.sun.com ([150.143.232.74] [150.143.232.74]) by relay22.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-678181; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:56:40 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.70]) by mms24es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-943678; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:56:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay24.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-9992519; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:56:39 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7H9ucp4006041; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:56:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7H9ubR9006003 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:56:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7H9ubPq001079; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:56:37 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:56:37 +0200 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:53:33 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <18116.28064.376384.587036@gargle.gargle.HOWL> To: james.d.carlson@Sun.COM Cc: PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, jek3@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c5701d.JN4+/EU0vwl3pAq8%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.28064.376384.587036@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2007 09:56:37.0516 (UTC) FILETIME=[E6DA74C0:01C7E0B4] Status: RO Content-Length: 5480 James Carlson wrote: > I see that the odd "cf" overwrite restriction goes away when renamed > to 'tar'. The other changes do not. > > I'm using star 1.5a74. I've also tried 1.5a80 with the same results. > Perhaps there's a newer version that lacks incompatibilities. I don't > know, and this really isn't the thread in which to discuss such > things. Instead, this should be the topic of a future case that > proposes replacing /usr/bin/tar. As pointed out repeatedly, this is > _not_ that case, and that case does _not_ exist. a74 is a bit old (more than a year). The current release is 1.5a83. 1.5a80 introduced the ability to tell star to be a bit more insecure. These new features allowed me to implement to implement undocumented behavior from Sun tar and Sun cpio (the related behavior is neither documented in Sun's man pages nor in the POSIX/SUSv2 standard). BFU depends on the undocumented behavior implemented by Sun cpio and a lot of users believe that "tar" should have some specific behavior in extract mode. The implemented "features" should be documented. I am sure that nobody really _knows_ that "tar" will remove any non-directory file (or empty directory) before extracting an object of te same name from the archive. I am also sure that nobody knows that cpio will even remove _non-empty_ directories without asking before..... Note that the features found in 1.5a80 are a result of my discussions about star integration to ON that I had with Joseph Kowalski. If you like to check "compatibility", you need to use 1.5a80 or newer. > Observe: > > % ls -l /opt/csw/bin/tar > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 Jul 31 11:21 /opt/csw/bin/tar -> star > % /opt/csw/bin/tar --version > suntar: star 1.5a80 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) > > Copyright (C) 1985, 88-90, 92-96, 98, 99, 2000-2007 Jörg Schilling > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO > warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. > % /opt/csw/bin/tar cf foo.tar /tmp/motd > /opt/csw/bin/tar: 1 blocks + 0 bytes (total of 10240 bytes = 10.00k). > % /opt/csw/bin/tar xf foo.tar /tmp/motd > /opt/csw/bin/tar: WARNING: skipping leading '/' on filenames. > /opt/csw/bin/tar: '/tmp/motd' did not match > /opt/csw/bin/tar: 1 blocks + 0 bytes (total of 10240 bytes = 10.00k). > > There's the first incompatibility. It fails to match files that are > clearly in the archive, because it's errantly skipping over the > leading '/' mark. > > % /opt/csw/bin/tar xf foo.tar > /opt/csw/bin/tar: WARNING: skipping leading '/' on filenames. > /opt/csw/bin/tar: 1 blocks + 0 bytes (total of 10240 bytes = 10.00k). > % ls -l /tmp/tmp/motd > -rw-r--r-- 1 carlsonj staff 720 Aug 16 11:22 /tmp/tmp/motd > > There's the second incompatibility. It's extracting to a different > location than the one that was archived. TAR is usually used to extract files to a different location than the files did have when creating the archive, This is because tar was not originally written as a backup program. UNIX in general behaves as "Garbage In -> Garbage Out". The examples you did make met the "Garbage In" condition. You will not get reasonable results with this kind of input. > I understand _why_ this was done and the security problems inherent in > (especially) allowing root to extract absolute files from an archive. > However, at the same time, this change is not compatible and _will_ > break consumers that rely on the existing behavior. These customers did ignore all FAQs that are available for archivers on UNIX. These FAQs tell you _not_ to put absolute path names into archives. If you are looking for a bug, then you found it in the archives that use absolute path names but not in star's default behavior. As the behavior may be changed by specifying -/, I see no problem with staying "secure by default". As I mentioned before, the POSIX standard does not forbid to by default disallowing the extraction of files that come with an absolute path name in the archive. Ignoring the resulting problems creates a serious vulnerability in the OS. For this reason, there is no way to discuss _whether_ to forbid such files by default. There is however room to discuss _how_ an archiver should handle the problem by default. If you are interested in technical based discussion, we could start to discuss _how_ to handle the problem... I am always open to better proposals! > It's unclear to me whether the stderr spewage will break anything, but > I wouldn't be surprised if it does. Most common utilities don't write > to stderr unless there's actually an error. Sending success messages > there is really strange. As I mentioned before, the star code is fully configurable and whether or not to supress an informational message that is similar to dd(1) and that exists in star since 1984 _is_ negotiable. Note that cpio from AT&T does print a similar message and that this message may not be swithced off. BTW: I invite everybody who is interested in a technical based discussion and open for better proposals to discuss the star integration on: star-discuss@opensolaris.org Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Fri Aug 17 03:26:40 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HAQeXj011643 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:26:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HAO8eL003024; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:24:08 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMW0060XY841900@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:24:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMW00EEHY83DE90@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:24:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay14i.sun.com (ip124.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.124]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7HALoUB011449; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:24:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp13es.sun.com ([160.41.209.23] [160.41.209.23]) by relay14i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-759595; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:24:03 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay12i.sun.com (relay12i.sun.com [129.179.4.122]) by mmp13es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-180767; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:24:02 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.87.18] [153.96.87.18]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3163958; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:24:02 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HANPga019350; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:23:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HANPBW019316 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:23:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7HANOCA002672; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:23:24 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:23:24 +0200 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:20:20 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708161543.l7GFhVQE024086@penguin.research.att.com> To: james.d.carlson@sun.com, gsf@research.att.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, jek3@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c57664.rn+r9/kN8f5k6lUY%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161543.l7GFhVQE024086@penguin.research.att.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2007 10:23:24.0636 (UTC) FILETIME=[A4C581C0:01C7E0B8] Status: RO Content-Length: 2972 Glenn Fowler wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:45:45 +0200 Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote: > > James Carlson wrote: > > > Let me try to first avoid to discuss things that are arguable... > > > > > Don should know that there is no POSIX violation. He did not prove his claim > > > > with a pointer to the POSIX standard, judge yourself whom to believe..... > > > > > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xcu/tar.html > > > > > > It says nothing about (mis)interpreting an absolute path name as a > > > relative one, or about switching that behavior on or off. > > > Correct, it does not forbid the behavor that has been chosen to make tar more > > safe. > > apologies for posting to a closed case > but I can't let this one go > an application does not have carte blanche to do operation X simply > because the standard does not forbid operation X Sorry, but you are following the discussions on the OpenGroup standard discussion list for a long time. You should know that it is the intention of the POSIX standard to completely and unambiguously describe the intended behavior of all utilities that are covered by the POSIX standard. We are currently talking about something that is called "unspecified behavior" with respect to standard terms. An application may choose any meaningful way to deal with unspecified parts of the standard. As there is a serious problem with archives that include files with absolute path names and as innumerable UNIX FAQs mention not to create such archives since ~ 30 years, I see no problem to implement archivers to be secure by default and to disallow the extraction of files with absolute path names. If you believe the POSIX standard leaves room for something you call unwanted, you need to file a defect report. > there are other complications > suppose the archive contains the symbolic link > /somedir/foo -> /dev/null > does the default "tar will be safe" mode interpret this as > ./somedir/foo -> ./dev/null > or > ./somedir/foo -> /dev/null Trying to forbid absulute path names in link targets is a bad idea. This has been overruled 18 years ago. If you believe that removing slashes from the beginning of absolute path names is a bad idea and if you are able to give good reasons for this, I am willing to negotiate a different behavior. This could be e.g. _skipping_ the extraction of these files instead of making the path name a relative path. I am alway open for constructive discussions... Note that star already _skips_ the extraction of files with "/../" in the path name unless -.. has been specified. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Fri Aug 17 03:50:49 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HAomBI011756 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:50:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HAmBbN001508; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:48:15 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMW00H0BZCDEU00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 04:48:14 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMW00FEQZCCXX60@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 04:48:12 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay23.sun.com (relay23.sun.com [192.12.251.54] (may be forged)) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7HAmBls000425; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:48:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms22es.sun.com ([150.143.232.34] [150.143.232.34]) by relay23.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-681647; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:48:11 +0000 (Z) Received: from mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com (mms24bas.mms.us.syntegra.com [192.12.251.70]) by mms22es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-873913; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:48:11 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay24.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-10045917; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:48:10 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HAm9Oi028394; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:48:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HAm86x028342 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:48:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7HAm8et003959; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:48:08 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:48:08 +0200 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:45:04 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46C48194.4060805@sun.com> To: Alan.Coopersmith@Sun.COM Cc: psarc-ext@Sun.COM, don.cragun@Sun.COM, Cynthia.Eastham@Sun.COM, Casper.Dik@Sun.COM Message-id: <46c57c30.GOL4XtzyLxdBqzch%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C48194.4060805@sun.com> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2007 10:48:08.0365 (UTC) FILETIME=[192495D0:01C7E0BC] Status: RO Content-Length: 960 Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > If we aggree that you provide documentation and that none of the sun tar > > enhancement that has been introduced after June 16th 2004 (using deprecated > > methods) needs to be supported but only the functionality needs to be present, > > this wouls be easy to achieve. > > That will not be agreed to - any replacement of tar must support all > enhancements that were made to Solaris tar up until the time of replacement. > We can't tell users to throw away all the tar files they have from the last > 3 years. This is why it is a bad idea to introduce incompatible options. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Fri Aug 17 03:52:38 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HAqb1A011818 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:52:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HAo0gb010626; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:50:05 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMW00603ZFEYP00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMW00FI8ZFEXN80@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay41i.sun.com ([192.5.209.70]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7HAo1QO020366; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:50:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mms48es.sun.com ([160.41.221.231] [160.41.221.231]) by relay41i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-287891; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:50:01 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay42i.sun.com ([192.5.209.72] [192.5.209.72]) by mms48es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-1030003; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:50:00 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.87.18] [153.96.87.18]) by relay4i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-11867564; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:50:00 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HAnpNd022498; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:49:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgwb1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HAnoFJ022482 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:49:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7HAnoUl004050; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:49:50 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:49:50 +0200 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:46:46 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <1187284052.909.238.camel@zippy> To: Garrett.Damore@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, lists@mcintyreweb.com, James.D.Carlson@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c57c96.UJLdC0lFtewVTU9n%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708110532.l7B5Wggn013644@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46bd9677.V23JZIsbBxWxfePw%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C1023C.9090001@sun.com> <46c1b382.0xgfYhhybG8AW4Ro%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C20A84.1010100@sun.com> <46c2c4d2.QEQI3Y7FmDV6TmYG%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18114.58368.955233.325353@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c317b8.wcOFVQ4eUqKqHZ3C%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C31C79.3040208@Sun.COM> <46c31e9b.R8+tHczL9hmnXzZ5%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46c33ce1.jrJE8OSo/cm0kxzf%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <40634.139.95.251.10.1187205367.squirrel@secure.mcintyreweb.com> <46c37f5f.LJicsLOCcrQlLBFI%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <1187217939.909.211.camel@zippy> <46c42fe8.EJnBTMPf0dKTXOFZ%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <1187284052.909.238.camel@zippy> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2007 10:49:50.0365 (UTC) FILETIME=[55F08CD0:01C7E0BC] Status: RO Content-Length: 1481 "Garrett D'Amore" wrote: > On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 13:07 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > "Garrett D'Amore" wrote: > > > > > Mostly I've avoided this conversation, but I want to inject two cents > > > here. > > > > > > First, I'm sorry that Joerg feels that his effort is intentionally being > > > stepped on. I really don't think that is what is being done here. > > > There are several different implementations, and they have evolved in > > > incompatible ways.... > > > > It seems that you did not yet understand the background. > > Give me a phone call and I will explain you the problem. > > Am I incorrect in my understanding that you're upset because the > introduction of -/ conflicts with what you had previously used -/ for in > your implementation of suntar.c (in star)? > > I've seen enough mail from you that I think you're misunderstanding what > Interface Stability means. Sun, Solaris, and OpenSolaris have *no* > commitment to interface stability of unbundled programs. Star is > currently unbundled/3rd party. Interface stability also means planning for forseeable problems that could occur in the future. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Fri Aug 17 03:53:29 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HArTwr011837 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HAowHg016739; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:50:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMW00707ZGV0O00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:50:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.43.25]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMW00FK2ZGUXN80@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:50:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay15i.sun.com (ip125.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.125]) by sca-ea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7HAosxO001085; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:50:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp11es.sun.com ([160.41.209.21] [160.41.209.21]) by relay15i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-781942; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:50:54 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay11i.sun.com (relay11i.sun.com [129.179.4.121]) by mmp11es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-195128; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:50:53 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay1i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3931236; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:50:53 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HAoq3D007080; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:50:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HAopkc007038 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:50:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7HAopOR004094; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:50:51 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:50:51 +0200 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:47:47 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <1187284524.909.241.camel@zippy> To: Garrett.Damore@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com Cc: psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, Casper.Dik@sun.com Message-id: <46c57cd3.B7v9PWFLk1zHfqqz%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> <1187284524.909.241.camel@zippy> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2007 10:50:51.0600 (UTC) FILETIME=[7A704500:01C7E0BC] Status: RO Content-Length: 641 "Garrett D'Amore" wrote: > Furthermore, I'll point that it was noted that Joerg was *not* on the > open call at the meeting yesterday. Joerg, you had the opportunity to > raise your objections during that concall. The agenda was sent out and > is fairly public. So why did nobody remond me to do so on wednesday? Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From Darren.Moffat@sun.com Fri Aug 17 04:01:27 2007 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HB1REh012313 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 04:01:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HAwvHu013239; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:58:57 +0100 (BST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMW00I01ZU82R00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 04:58:56 -0600 (MDT) Received: from gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com ([129.156.42.6]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMW00F12ZU7XX90@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 04:58:55 -0600 (MDT) Received: from d1-emea-09.sun.com ([192.18.2.119]) by gmp-ea-fw-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7HAwsIg022953; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:58:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.d1-emea-09.sun.com by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JMW00301ZS0GR00@d1-emea-09.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Moffat@Sun.COM); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:58:54 +0100 (BST) Received: from [129.156.173.136] by d1-emea-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMW00194ZU5CB30@d1-emea-09.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:58:54 +0100 (BST) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:58:53 +0100 From: Darren J Moffat Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c57cd3.B7v9PWFLk1zHfqqz%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Darren.Moffat@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: Garrett.Damore@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, Casper.Dik@sun.com Message-id: <46C57F6D.8030806@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> <1187284524.909.241.camel@zippy> <46c57cd3.B7v9PWFLk1zHfqqz%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070703) Status: RO Content-Length: 635 Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Garrett D'Amore" wrote: > >> Furthermore, I'll point that it was noted that Joerg was *not* on the >> open call at the meeting yesterday. Joerg, you had the opportunity to >> raise your objections during that concall. The agenda was sent out and >> is fairly public. > > So why did nobody remond me to do so on wednesday? Because nobody else gets personal reminders. If you want to participate in ARC discussion it is your responsibility to be aware of how the ARC process works and read the public agenda announcements available in the arc community. -- Darren J Moffat From Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de Fri Aug 17 05:24:54 2007 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HCOssZ013250 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 05:24:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HCMQnr008201; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 05:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMX00N473PE2600@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 06:22:26 -0600 (MDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMX00JWA3PD7M20@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 06:22:25 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay17i.sun.com (ip127.net129179-4.block1.us.syntegra.com [129.179.4.127]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7HCL5VD019636; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:22:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mmp13es.sun.com ([160.41.209.23] [160.41.209.23]) by relay17i.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-836416; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:22:25 +0000 (Z) Received: from relay16i.sun.com (relay16i.sun.com [129.179.4.126]) by mmp13es.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-241494; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:22:25 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de ([153.96.1.18] [153.96.1.18]) by relay1ib.sun.com with ESMTP id BT-MMP-3119462; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:22:24 +0000 (Z) Received: from mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HCMHtE015764; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:22:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de [195.37.77.164]) by mailgw1.fraunhofer.de (8.13.5+/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l7HCMGdC015710 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:22:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de (bohr [10.147.9.231]) by pluto.fokus.fraunhofer.de (8.13.7/8.13.7) with SMTP id l7HCMGXm009069; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:22:16 +0200 (MEST) Received: from burner ([10.147.65.166]) by EXCHSRV.fokus.fraunhofer.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:22:16 +0200 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:19:12 +0200 From: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <200708161917.l7GJHDxw009983@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> To: don.cragun@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46c59240.duxhOR62G2TS7g4+%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted References: <200708161917.l7GJHDxw009983@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> User-Agent: nail 11.22 3/20/05 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2007 12:22:16.0456 (UTC) FILETIME=[3FAAE080:01C7E0C9] Status: RO Content-Length: 8443 Don Cragun wrote: > >This is a hazardous claim. I know of no part of the POSIX standard that > >prevents tar/cpio/pax from implementing a security aware behavior by default. > >It seems that you also know this - otherwise you could give a pointer that > >proves your claim. > The descriptions of cpio in SVID3 (Volume V, pages 8-2 through 8-4), > XPG3 (Volume 1, pages 74 through 76), XPG4 (Commands and Utilities > Volume, pages 219-222), SUS (Commands and Utilities Volume, pages 219 > through 222), SUSv2 (Commands and Utilities Volume, pages 226-229) all > say essentially the same thing (the following quote is from SUSv2) in > the description of the -i option: > "(Copy in.) Extract files from the standard input, which is > assumed to be the product of a previous cpio -o. Only files > with names that match patterns are selected. The extracted > files are conditionally created and copied into the current > directory tree based on the options described below. The > permissions of the files will be those of the previous cpio > -o. The owner and group of the files will be that of the > current user unless the user has appropriate privileges, which > causes cpio to retain the owner and group of the files of the > previous cpio -o. If the archive being read does not match the > modifier specified**1, cpio may consider this an error and exit > or may recognise the archive and continue processing. Only a > user with appropriate privileges can extract block special or > character special files from an archive." > **1 This refers to the presence or absence of the c modifier which > specifies whether or not character mode headers (as defined by > POSIX) or binary mode headers are used. SVID3 specifies -H odc, > -H crc, -H tar, and -H ustar formats as well as the -c option. > Nothing in the description of cpio nor any of its options or option > modifiers in these standards allow cpio to arbitrarily change the > pathname of a file being extracted from an archive. Sun's cpio does > add a -r option allowing files to be interactively renamed as they are > extracted. Nothing in this quote prevents to disallow the extraction of files with absolute path names by default for security reasons. > For the pax utility, POSIX.2-1992, XPG4, SUS, SUSv2, and > SUSv3/POSIX.1-2001 the requirements are (quotes from SUSv3/POSIX.1-2001 > with corrigenda 1 and 2 applied): > XCU6, P698, L26888-26893 (first part of pax utility description > of read mode): > "In read mode (when -r is specified, but -w is not), pax > shall extract the members of the archive file read from > the standard input, with pathnames matching the > specified patterns. If an extracted file is of type > directory, the file hierarchy rooted at that file shall > be extracted as well. The extracted files shall be > created performing pathname resolution with the > directory in which pax was invoked as the current > working directory." > > XBD6, P100, L3136-3142 (second paragraph of the description of > the General Concept "Pathname Resolution"): > "Each filename in the pathname is located in the > directory specified by > its predecessor (for example, in the pathname fragment > a/b, file b is located in directory a). Pathname > resolution shall fail if this cannot be accomplished. > If the pathname begins with a slash, the predecessor of > the first filename shall be taken to be the root > directory of the process (such pathnames are referred > to as ``absolute pathnames''). If the pathname does > not begin with a slash, the predecessor of the first > filename of the pathname shall be taken to be the > current working directory of the process (such > pathnames are referred to as ``relative pathnames'')." Nothing in this quote prevents to disallow the extraction of files with absolute path names by default for security reasons. > So the standards clearly require that absolute pathnames extracted from > archives by pax have / as their parent directory; not the current > directory unless you use an option that changes this default behavior. To understand the text you quote, you need to read this before: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/xbd_chap03.html http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/xbd_chap04.html The POSIX standard explicitly allows/requires to base file creation on permissions and on security policies. It is obvious that security policies have a higher precedence than not fully qualified utility descriptions. > The standard provides an option that mimics star's default behavior. > When extracting files from an archive, three ways to specify it would > be: > pax -r -s ",^/,," -x cpio < cpio_archive > pax -r -s "/^\///" -x pax < pax_archive > pax -r -s "x^/xx" -x ustar < ustar_archive Besides the fact that using -x in extract mode may cause problems, this does not solve the security issues I was talking about. It is interesting to see that you now try to think in the pax philosogy while this ARC case ignores the pax philosohy. We did mention a methods thay better fit the pax philosophy for the purpose of this ARC case. How could this happen? > >In fact, the behavior of the current Sun implementaions for tar/cpio/pax > >allow people to easily attack the integrity of Solaris installation by adding > >simple hand-crafted changes into tar or cpio archives that are going to be > >unpacked by the administrator with sufficient privileges. > > If an administrator copies files onto his or her system without > verifying what files are being copied, the underlying system will > always be vulnerable. A secure archiver implementation grants you that if you extract an archive into an empty directory, no file outside this directory will be harmed. Star is by default nearly fully secure and fully secure if you specify the option "-secure-links". The archivers provided by Sun are not security aware by amy means. Insisting in having a highly vulnerable system does not look promising. > >Star and it's different CLI implementations just care anbout vulnerability > >issues from hand crafted archives or archives that have been created in a > >problematic way by accident, the current Sun implementations of the same > >programs ignore this problem. > > The current Sun implementations adhere to the standards. If you > believe this is a serious security flaw in pax, you should file an > interpretation request to The Austin Group and suggest changes that > need to be made to the standard to avoid the issue. If you want a fix > for this to get into the next revision of the standard, you have until > the end of this month to file the interpretation request. The current tar/cpio/pax implementations from the star package adhere to standards. If you believe that you found a bug, file a bug description and give evidence for claiming that there is a bug. > I don't need to inform myself anymore about the star project. The fact > that star violates the standard by modifying the pathnames of extracted > files means that star can't be renamed /usr/bin/tar and maintain Please do not claim that star violates the standard without proving it. > >Now, please do your homework.... > > I have done my homework. You have called me a liar and you have said I > don't know the standards. Please do your homework and quote text in > any of the standards I mentioned above that allow cpio, pax, and tar to > arbitrarily change the pathnames of files being extracted from archives. I did not call you a liar, so it seems that you are trying to become personal..... I did do my homework, you have not been able to prove your POSIX related claims - sorry. > Sincerely, > Donald W. Cragun > Chair of the IEEE PASC Shell and Utilities Working Group > Member of the IEEE PASC Sponsor Executive Committee > IEEE PASC's Organizational Representative to The Austin Group > Sun's primary representative to The Open Group's Base Working Group "I have a gun" is no argument in a technical based discussion. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Fri Aug 17 06:00:01 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HD00Os013663 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 06:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HCvQJk018381; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 20:57:30 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMX00D035BSDX00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 05:57:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMX00D685BR0X30@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 05:57:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7HCgS7C108916; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:42:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l7HCgRNj108913; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:42:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:42:27 -0400 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c59240.duxhOR62G2TS7g4+%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) Cc: don.cragun@Sun.COM, PSARC-ext@Sun.COM, ogb-discuss@opensolaris.org Message-id: <18117.38835.736073.112750@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708161917.l7GJHDxw009983@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c59240.duxhOR62G2TS7g4+%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 862 Joerg Schilling writes: > I did not call you a liar, so it seems that you are trying to become > personal..... > > I did do my homework, you have not been able to prove your POSIX related > claims - sorry. This discussion has nothing to do with governance. Please take it off the OGB list. It also has nothing to do with the ARC case that was originally under discussion and that is now closed. Please take it off the PSARC list. If you wish to continue, I might suggest the security-discuss list. It seems the main discussion here is about alleged security problems in OpenSolaris utilities. Thanks for improving the S/N ratio. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From Garrett.Damore@sun.com Fri Aug 17 07:56:15 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HEuEsc015374 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 07:56:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HErd8q002991; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 22:53:43 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMX0080LAPGMF00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:53:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMX00JDOAPD7L90@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:53:40 -0600 (MDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l7HErbtx011400; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 07:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JMX00E01AE38900@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Garrett.Damore@Sun.COM); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 07:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.251.21] ([76.174.83.55]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JMX00HK6AOU9I90@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 07:53:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 07:49:16 -0700 From: "Garrett D'Amore" Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c57cd3.B7v9PWFLk1zHfqqz%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Sender: Garrett.Damore@sun.com To: Joerg Schilling Cc: Darren.Moffat@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com, Casper.Dik@sun.com Message-id: <1187362156.909.289.camel@zippy> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.2 Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> <1187284524.909.241.camel@zippy> <46c57cd3.B7v9PWFLk1zHfqqz%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> Status: RO Content-Length: 619 On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 12:47 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Garrett D'Amore" wrote: > > > Furthermore, I'll point that it was noted that Joerg was *not* on the > > open call at the meeting yesterday. Joerg, you had the opportunity to > > raise your objections during that concall. The agenda was sent out and > > is fairly public. > > So why did nobody remond me to do so on wednesday? > > Jörg > Uh, because it was nobody's job to do so? Are you on PSARC-ext? The agendas are typically sent out on Monday, IIRC. There is also a public schedule posted on the website. -- Garrett From dan.mick@sun.com Fri Aug 17 11:31:32 2007 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HIVWos020130 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:31:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HISmB2011653 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:psarc-ext@sun.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:28:49 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMX00231KOFK800@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from engmail4sca.SFBay.Sun.COM ([129.145.155.74]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMX00ICOKOE7U60@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for psarc-ext@sun.com (ORCPT psarc-ext@sun.com); Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:29:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.150.17.236] (vpn-129-150-17-236.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.17.236]) by engmail4sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HISv5S008638; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:28:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:28:53 -0700 From: Dan Mick Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c57cd3.B7v9PWFLk1zHfqqz%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: Garrett.Damore@sun.com, Darren.Moffat@sun.com, psarc-ext@sun.com, Casper.Dik@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C5E8E5.9090503@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708151901.l7FJ1hTU007219@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46c42883.lZ9pXjkoWwQcDlyb%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200708161102.l7GB255B003990@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> <46c44787.Gn6xxcyZO5zIYMsN%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <46C44947.2090108@Sun.COM> <1187284524.909.241.camel@zippy> <46c57cd3.B7v9PWFLk1zHfqqz%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509) Status: RO Content-Length: 83 Joerg Schilling wrote: > So why did nobody remond me to do so on wednesday? Wow. From jek3@sun.com Fri Aug 17 14:44:46 2007 Received: from sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7HLij6J026269 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:44:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l7HLg7AA013326; Sat, 18 Aug 2007 05:42:11 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JMX00I01TMA6O00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:42:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.17.63]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JMX00DZNTMAYC60@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:42:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.150.12.124] (vpn-129-150-12-124.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.150.12.124]) by jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l7HLg8b8229651; Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:42:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 11:39:12 -1000 From: Joseph Kowalski Subject: Re: CIFS system attributes support for cpio(1), pax(1), tar(1) [PSARC/2007/459 FastTrack timeout 08/17/2007] In-reply-to: <46c5701d.JN4+/EU0vwl3pAq8%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> To: Joerg Schilling Cc: james.d.carlson@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, don.cragun@sun.com, Cynthia.Eastham@sun.com Message-id: <46C61580.90300@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200708160049.l7G0nDv5008491@spartan.SFBay.Sun.COM> <46C3C7B4.507@sun.com> <18116.14882.156655.231193@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c452b7.D7nc5cqOHgfRuN9x%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.23716.91714.538887@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c46319.uWfhRiYWU3eJvSzn%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> <18116.28064.376384.587036@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <46c5701d.JN4+/EU0vwl3pAq8%Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060925) Status: RO Content-Length: 415 Joerg Schilling wrote: > Note that the features found in 1.5a80 are a result of my discussions about star > integration to ON that I had with Joseph Kowalski. > Yep. We discussed this, but we never closed on this. I think this was a good faith effort on both of our parts, but none-the-less, it never got written down in a PSARC correct format. At least we now agree that we had such a discussion. - jek3