[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness |
Date: |
Sat, 17 Apr 2004 01:21:47 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Alexandre Duret-Lutz <address@hidden> writes:
> How about this scheme:
In the light of later discussion, how about this scheme instead?
Use the first of the following commands that works:
tar --format=ustar
tar
pax -x ustar
I wouldn't bother with POSIXLY_CORRECT=1 or "tar -o", as they don't
really help much these days.
> On second though, shouldn't we try to use pax first? tar is no
> longer a POSIX requirement, right?
The "tar" command has never been a POSIX requirement. However, "pax"
has never caught on, for various reasons, and it hasn't been
road-tested as much as "tar" has. It makes sense to use "pax" if
"tar" is not available, but I wouldn't make "pax" my first choice.
> Also do we really need to try `-o'?
I vaguely recall that RMS used to suggest -o in the GNU coding
standards, for compatibility with v7 'tar', but that requirement is no
longer necessary (it's not in the standards now, anyway).
> Besides GNU tar, is there some tar implementation that does not
> default to the ustar format?
Many tar implementations have trouble with path names longer than 99
bytes. This includes the current GNU tar official latest non-alpha
release (which is buggy in this area). It would be reasonable to add
an automake option that checks for longer-than-99-byte file names, for
people who are worried about such things. But I don't think it needs
to be high priority.
- AMTAR brokenness, Roger Leigh, 2004/04/01
- Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/15
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/17
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Roger Leigh, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Eric Sunshine, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Gunnar Ritter, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/19