2009-03-06 12:26:56 +00:00
|
|
|
diff -ruNp tar-1.22.orig/src/list.c tar-1.22/src/list.c
|
|
|
|
--- tar-1.22.orig/src/list.c 2008-10-30 12:10:04.000000000 +0100
|
|
|
|
+++ tar-1.22/src/list.c 2009-03-06 00:03:05.925105425 +0100
|
2010-03-12 13:55:48 +00:00
|
|
|
@@ -138,6 +138,14 @@ read_and (void (*do_something) (void))
|
2005-01-07 11:04:21 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!ignore_zeros_option)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
+ /*
|
|
|
|
+ * According to POSIX tar specs, this is wrong, but on the web
|
|
|
|
+ * there are some tar specs that can trigger this, and some tar
|
|
|
|
+ * implementations create tars according to that spec. For now,
|
|
|
|
+ * let's not be pedantic about issuing the warning.
|
|
|
|
+ */
|
|
|
|
+#if 0
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
|
char buf[UINTMAX_STRSIZE_BOUND];
|
|
|
|
|
2010-03-12 13:55:48 +00:00
|
|
|
status = read_header (¤t_header, ¤t_stat_info,
|
|
|
|
@@ -147,6 +155,9 @@ read_and (void (*do_something) (void))
|
|
|
|
WARNOPT (WARN_ALONE_ZERO_BLOCK,
|
|
|
|
(0, 0, _("A lone zero block at %s"),
|
|
|
|
STRINGIFY_BIGINT (current_block_ordinal (), buf)));
|
2005-01-07 11:04:21 +00:00
|
|
|
+#endif
|
2010-03-12 13:55:48 +00:00
|
|
|
+ status = read_header (¤t_header, ¤t_stat_info,
|
|
|
|
+ read_header_auto);
|
2005-01-07 11:04:21 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
status = prev_status;
|