Re: [Bug-tar] bug or feature?

[Bruce Dubbs]

Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 12/14/2017 12:03 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> > Is there any reason that tar should change the permissions or ownership
> > of the . directory if it is present in a tarball?
>
> Yes, as that's what tar has done "forever" and quite possibly some people
> depend on it. It might be a good idea to omit extraction of "." unless
> some new option is specified.

Just because it's always been done that way does not make it right.  To my 
mind extracting . can never create a directory.  It is already present by 
definition.  At most it could change permissions and then only if the user 
owned the directory (or was root).  I suppose it could also change the 
directory owner/group if the effective user was root.

To my mind it would be totally unexpected by most users.

I would not think it is a normal use of tar.  Specifying * instead of . 
when creating would be better but may not include hidden files/directories.

Perhaps a new option --preserve-directory-permissions would be reasonable. 
 It would apply to any existing directory upon extraction.

  -- Bruce