From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Sat Feb 2 16:02:47 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55CF314C1788 for ; Sat, 2 Feb 2019 16:02:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from hz.grosbein.net (hz.grosbein.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:d12:604::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hz.grosbein.net", Issuer "hz.grosbein.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A4848C7BC for ; Sat, 2 Feb 2019 16:02:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (eg.sd.rdtc.ru [IPv6:2a03:3100:c:13:0:0:0:5]) by hz.grosbein.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x12G2Qfs059798 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 2 Feb 2019 17:02:27 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) X-Envelope-From: eugen@grosbein.net X-Envelope-To: imp@bsdimp.com Received: from [10.58.0.4] ([10.58.0.4]) by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x12G2Q0k031473 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 2 Feb 2019 23:02:26 +0700 (+07) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Subject: Re: Status of libarchive/bsdtar maintainership To: Warner Losh References: <5C53E4FE.1010501@grosbein.net> Cc: FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List From: Eugene Grosbein Message-ID: Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 23:02:18 +0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOCAL_FROM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -2.3 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record * 2.6 LOCAL_FROM From my domains X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on hz.grosbein.net X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7A4848C7BC X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=permerror (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of eugen@grosbein.net uses mechanism not recognized by this client) smtp.mailfrom=eugen@grosbein.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MX_INVALID(0.50)[greylisted]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[grosbein.net]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; R_SPF_PERMFAIL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.92)[-0.923,0]; IP_SCORE(-1.48)[ip: (-2.73), ipnet: 2a01:4f8::/29(-2.42), asn: 24940(-2.25), country: DE(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:2a01:4f8::/29, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2019 16:02:47 -0000 02.02.2019 6:35, Warner Losh wrote: > They didn't fix it in 3 months, sure. But it wasn't clear from the issue > that you had an actual fix (I certainly missed that the first time through > when I only looked at the github and not at our bug database). > I'd try submitting a pull request and see what happens. > I'd also send an email to mm@ telling him about the pull request > and asking when he'll have time to look into integrating it or commenting on it. > If he won't have time to get to it soon, I'd make the commit referencing the upstream pull request > so the next person who imports things will notice if they tweak it before accepting the request. In fact, I have no real fix suitable for committing "as is". All I have is description of some serious problem (regression) and no more than draft patch that shows root of the problem. The patch may have some design issues or break another corner case or be incomplete in a way etc. However, it fixes common case and allows to continue using bsdtar for backups. My question is not about this patch but about ${Subject}. "Common protocol" assumes at least moderate level of upstream support and this assumption seems to be wrong for libarchive presently.