Report forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Bdale Garbee <bdale@gag.com>:
Bug#114229; Package tar.
debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.orgBdale Garbee
Subject: Bug#114229: Shouldn't complain about timestamps in the future
Reply-To: "M. Hari Nezumi" , 114229@bugs.debian.org
Resent-From: "M. Hari Nezumi"
Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org
Resent-CC: Bdale Garbee
Resent-Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 18:33:01 GMT
Resent-Message-ID:
Resent-Sender: owner@bugs.debian.org
X-Debian-PR-Message: report 114229
X-Debian-PR-Package: tar
X-Debian-PR-Keywords:
X-Loop: owner@bugs.debian.org
Received: via spool by submit@bugs.debian.org id=B.100204696214344
(code B ref -1); Tue, 02 Oct 2001 18:33:01 GMT
From: "M. Hari Nezumi"
To: Debian Bug Tracking System
X-Reportbug-Version: 1.25
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.25
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 12:26:01 -0600
Message-Id:
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Package: tar
Version: 1.13.19-1
Severity: wishlist
I synchronize my computer's clock to an NTP server. When I create a tar file,
it puts on my local timestamp. Then I decompress the same tar file on another
machine (using tar xvpf, since I want to preserve the file permissions, which
IMO should be done by default, but that's another matter). The machine I
extract it on syncs to an NTP server which is a few minutes behind. So when I
extract the tar file, I get a whole bunch of errors like:
tar: public_html/gallery/audio/fp/fans.html: time stamp 2001-10-02 11:12:33 is 127 s in the future
which is very annoying. :) It also gets in the way of me seeing any *real*
errors which may have occurred.
Basically, it'd be nice if it didn't complain about future timestamps like
that, or if it only complained once per archive or something.
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux trikuare 2.4.8 #1 Mon Sep 3 10:36:12 MDT 2001 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages tar depends on:
ii libc6 2.2.4-1 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
Acknowledgement sent to "M. Hari Nezumi" <magenta@trikuare.cx>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Bdale Garbee <bdale@gag.com>.
-t
From: owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System)
To: "M. Hari Nezumi"
Subject: Bug#114229: Acknowledgement (Shouldn't complain about timestamps in the future)
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
References:
X-Debian-PR-Message: ack 114229
Reply-To: 114229@bugs.debian.org
Thank you for the problem report you have sent regarding Debian.
This is an automatically generated reply, to let you know your message has
been received. It is being forwarded to the developers mailing list for
their attention; they will reply in due course.
Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s):
Bdale Garbee
If you wish to submit further information on your problem, please send
it to 114229@bugs.debian.org (and *not* to
submit@bugs.debian.org).
Please do not reply to the address at the top of this message,
unless you wish to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system.
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 2 Oct 2001 18:22:42 +0000
From magenta@trikuare.cx Tue Oct 02 13:22:42 2001
Return-path:
Received: from robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.65]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 15oUBm-0003jH-00; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 13:22:42 -0500
Received: from porcupine.trikuare.cx (1Cust165.tnt2.las-cruces.nm.da.uu.net [63.38.196.165])
by robin.mail.pas.earthlink.net (8.11.5/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f92IMZT11284;
Tue, 2 Oct 2001 11:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from trikuare.trikuare.cx ([192.168.1.2] ident=magenta)
by porcupine.trikuare.cx with smtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
id 15oSb4-0002Cf-00; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 10:40:42 -0600
Received: by trikuare.trikuare.cx (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 2 Oct 2001 12:26:01 -0600
From: "M. Hari Nezumi"
To: Debian Bug Tracking System
Subject: Shouldn't complain about timestamps in the future
X-Reportbug-Version: 1.25
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.25
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 12:26:01 -0600
Message-Id:
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Package: tar
Version: 1.13.19-1
Severity: wishlist
I synchronize my computer's clock to an NTP server. When I create a tar file,
it puts on my local timestamp. Then I decompress the same tar file on another
machine (using tar xvpf, since I want to preserve the file permissions, which
IMO should be done by default, but that's another matter). The machine I
extract it on syncs to an NTP server which is a few minutes behind. So when I
extract the tar file, I get a whole bunch of errors like:
tar: public_html/gallery/audio/fp/fans.html: time stamp 2001-10-02 11:12:33 is 127 s in the future
which is very annoying. :) It also gets in the way of me seeing any *real*
errors which may have occurred.
Basically, it'd be nice if it didn't complain about future timestamps like
that, or if it only complained once per archive or something.
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux trikuare 2.4.8 #1 Mon Sep 3 10:36:12 MDT 2001 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages tar depends on:
ii libc6 2.2.4-1 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org:
Bug#114229; Package tar.
debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org
Subject: Bug#114229: Shouldn't complain about timestamps in the future
Reply-To: Bdale Garbee , 114229@bugs.debian.org
Resent-From: Bdale Garbee
Original-Sender: bdale@rover.gag.com
Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org
Resent-Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 21:48:01 GMT
Resent-Message-ID:
Resent-Sender: owner@bugs.debian.org
X-Debian-PR-Message: report 114229
X-Debian-PR-Package: tar
X-Debian-PR-Keywords:
X-Loop: owner@bugs.debian.org
Received: via spool by 114229-submit@bugs.debian.org id=B114229.100205909532197
(code B ref 114229); Tue, 02 Oct 2001 21:48:01 GMT
Sender: bdale@rover.gag.com
To: "M. Hari Nezumi" , 114229@bugs.debian.org
References:
From: Bdale Garbee
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 15:41:53 -0600
In-Reply-To:
(magenta@trikuare.cx's message of "2 Oct 2001 12:42:38 -0600")
Message-ID: <87itdxiuse.fsf@rover.gag.com>
Lines: 8
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/20.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Delivered-To: 114229@bugs.debian.org
magenta@trikuare.cx (M. Hari Nezumi) writes:
> ... syncs to an NTP server which is a few minutes behind.
Of course, the notion that a server using NTP could be "a few minutes behind"
is pretty bad... Probably worth getting fixed regardless of how tar behaves.
Bdale
Acknowledgement sent to Bdale Garbee <bdale@gag.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list.
-t
From: owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System)
To: Bdale Garbee
Subject: Bug#114229: Info received (was Bug#114229: Shouldn't complain about timestamps in the future)
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <87itdxiuse.fsf@rover.gag.com>
References: <87itdxiuse.fsf@rover.gag.com>
X-Debian-PR-Message: ack-info 114229
Disabled-Doogie-Reply-To: 114229@bugs.debian.org
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has been forwarded to the developer(s) and
to the developers mailing list to accompany the original report.
If you wish to continue to submit further information on your problem,
please send it to 114229@bugs.debian.org, as before.
Please do not reply to the address at the top of this message,
unless you wish to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system.
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Received: (at 114229) by bugs.debian.org; 2 Oct 2001 21:44:55 +0000
From bdale@gag.com Tue Oct 02 16:44:55 2001
Return-path:
Received: from rover.gag.com [192.133.104.32]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 15oXLT-0008NG-00; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 16:44:55 -0500
Received: by rover.gag.com (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id F3C3D3BC55; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 15:41:53 -0600 (MDT)
Sender: bdale@rover.gag.com
To: "M. Hari Nezumi" , 114229@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#114229: Shouldn't complain about timestamps in the future
References:
From: Bdale Garbee
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 15:41:53 -0600
In-Reply-To:
(magenta@trikuare.cx's message of "2 Oct 2001 12:42:38 -0600")
Message-ID: <87itdxiuse.fsf@rover.gag.com>
Lines: 8
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/20.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Delivered-To: 114229@bugs.debian.org
magenta@trikuare.cx (M. Hari Nezumi) writes:
> ... syncs to an NTP server which is a few minutes behind.
Of course, the notion that a server using NTP could be "a few minutes behind"
is pretty bad... Probably worth getting fixed regardless of how tar behaves.
Bdale
Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Bdale Garbee <bdale@gag.com>:
Bug#114229; Package tar.
debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.orgBdale Garbee
Subject: Bug#114229: Shouldn't complain about timestamps in the future
Reply-To: "M. Hari Nezumi" , 114229@bugs.debian.org
Resent-From: "M. Hari Nezumi"
Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org
Resent-CC: Bdale Garbee
Resent-Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 22:33:02 GMT
Resent-Message-ID:
Resent-Sender: owner@bugs.debian.org
X-Debian-PR-Message: report 114229
X-Debian-PR-Package: tar
X-Debian-PR-Keywords:
X-Loop: owner@bugs.debian.org
Received: via spool by 114229-submit@bugs.debian.org id=B114229.10020611255071
(code B ref 114229); Tue, 02 Oct 2001 22:33:02 GMT
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 15:18:42 -0700
From: "M. Hari Nezumi"
To: Bdale Garbee
Cc: 114229@bugs.debian.org
Message-ID: <20011002151842.A12223@bokbok.squeep.com>
References: <87itdxiuse.fsf@rover.gag.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <87itdxiuse.fsf@rover.gag.com>; from bdale@gag.com on Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 03:41:53PM -0600
Delivered-To: 114229@bugs.debian.org
On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 03:41:53PM -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> magenta@trikuare.cx (M. Hari Nezumi) writes:
>
> > ... syncs to an NTP server which is a few minutes behind.
>
> Of course, the notion that a server using NTP could be "a few minutes behind"
> is pretty bad... Probably worth getting fixed regardless of how tar behaves.
Yeah, of course, but that's besides the point. What about a machine which
is just getting set up and doesn't have ntpd on, for example? IMO,
absolute system time is one of those things which shouldn't be relied on to
an extreme. Obviously, it's very useful for stuff (such as triggering at
or cron events), and to an extent the well-ordered nature of relative time
as well (though of course NTP updates can still cause problems, and of
course there's always the potential for relativistic effects due to
travelling at very high relative velocities).
Also, there's other situations where the time can be "correct" but have
different epoch-based timestamps, for example if the timezone is set
incorrectly. The local time appears correct (aside from the timezone), but
the UTC time is not.
Philosophy aside, it's still really annoying to get a warning on every
single file, and it really shouldn't warn more than once, preferrably
deferred to the end... I like how Make handles it - it waits until the end
of the build cycle and then says, "By the way, clock skew was detected." I
see no reason to put the warning on every file.
--
Magenta H. Nezumi
http://trikuare.cx - home of the porcupine
Acknowledgement sent to "M. Hari Nezumi" <magenta@trikuare.cx>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Bdale Garbee <bdale@gag.com>.
-t
From: owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System)
To: "M. Hari Nezumi"
Subject: Bug#114229: Info received (was Bug#114229: Shouldn't complain about timestamps in the future)
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To: <20011002151842.A12223@bokbok.squeep.com>
References: <20011002151842.A12223@bokbok.squeep.com>
X-Debian-PR-Message: ack-info 114229
Disabled-Doogie-Reply-To: 114229@bugs.debian.org
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has been forwarded to the developer(s) and
to the developers mailing list to accompany the original report.
Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s):
Bdale Garbee
If you wish to continue to submit further information on your problem,
please send it to 114229@bugs.debian.org, as before.
Please do not reply to the address at the top of this message,
unless you wish to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system.
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Received: (at 114229) by bugs.debian.org; 2 Oct 2001 22:18:45 +0000
From magenta@bokbok.squeep.com Tue Oct 02 17:18:45 2001
Return-path:
Received: from bokbok.squeep.com [205.158.23.172] (root)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 15oXsD-0001Jh-00; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:18:45 -0500
Received: (from magenta@localhost)
by bokbok.squeep.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id f92MIg513077;
Tue, 2 Oct 2001 15:18:42 -0700
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 15:18:42 -0700
From: "M. Hari Nezumi"
To: Bdale Garbee
Cc: 114229@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#114229: Shouldn't complain about timestamps in the future
Message-ID: <20011002151842.A12223@bokbok.squeep.com>
References: <87itdxiuse.fsf@rover.gag.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <87itdxiuse.fsf@rover.gag.com>; from bdale@gag.com on Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 03:41:53PM -0600
Delivered-To: 114229@bugs.debian.org
On Tue, Oct 02, 2001 at 03:41:53PM -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> magenta@trikuare.cx (M. Hari Nezumi) writes:
>
> > ... syncs to an NTP server which is a few minutes behind.
>
> Of course, the notion that a server using NTP could be "a few minutes behind"
> is pretty bad... Probably worth getting fixed regardless of how tar behaves.
Yeah, of course, but that's besides the point. What about a machine which
is just getting set up and doesn't have ntpd on, for example? IMO,
absolute system time is one of those things which shouldn't be relied on to
an extreme. Obviously, it's very useful for stuff (such as triggering at
or cron events), and to an extent the well-ordered nature of relative time
as well (though of course NTP updates can still cause problems, and of
course there's always the potential for relativistic effects due to
travelling at very high relative velocities).
Also, there's other situations where the time can be "correct" but have
different epoch-based timestamps, for example if the timezone is set
incorrectly. The local time appears correct (aside from the timezone), but
the UTC time is not.
Philosophy aside, it's still really annoying to get a warning on every
single file, and it really shouldn't warn more than once, preferrably
deferred to the end... I like how Make handles it - it waits until the end
of the build cycle and then says, "By the way, clock skew was detected." I
see no reason to put the warning on every file.
--
Magenta H. Nezumi
http://trikuare.cx - home of the porcupine