[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness

From: Alexandre Duret-Lutz
Subject: Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:41:21 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.1003 (Gnus v5.10.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux)

>>> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <address@hidden> writes:
>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:

 >>> Forcing the ustar format might be a possibility (is it?), if
 >>> that can be done portably (that probably involves a configure
 >>> check).

 Paul> Yes, I think this is the best approach: that is, use --format=ustar if
 Paul> available, then -o if that works, otherwise don't use anything.
 adl> Ok.  I'll try to do both of these this week-end and Cc the patch
 adl> to bug-tar for comments.

On second though, shouldn't we try to use pax first?  tar is no
longer a POSIX requirement, right?

Also do we really need to try `-o'?  This sounds odd because we
are trying to get rid of the 100-char limit, and using `-o'
would means `make dist' will work for deep trees on some
platform and not on some others.

Besides GNU tar, is there some tar implementation that does not
default to the ustar format?

How about this scheme:

  Use `pax -x ustar' if it works.

  Otherwise try `tar --format=ustar'.

  Otherwise use `POSIXLY_CORRECT=1 tar'.  (I'm assuming that
  POSIXLY_CORRECT=1 will coerce older tar versions into 
  producing ustar format.  Am I wrong, or is there another 

Alexandre Duret-Lutz

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]