Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: patch-log sizes

[Aaron Bentley]

On Tue, 2003-12-16 at 19:04, Miles Bader wrote:
> Would it be practical to allow some sort of compacted patch-log storage
> for sets of old patch-logs, e.g., a .tar.gz file, managed via explicit
> user commands?

For your purposes, it might be an advantage to *not* compress the tar
files.  Your primary reason for using tars is to represent several small
files as one larger file, which an uncompressed tar can do.

It seems like you might want to add new files to the tar file, and it's
easy to append new files into an uncompressed tar (tar -rvf foo.tar
bar).  But it's not possible to do this with a compressed tar-- you must
uncompress it first.

Essentially, uncompressed tars solve the original problem and behave
more like filesystems.

Aaron

-- 
Aaron Bentley
Director of Technology
PanoMetrics, Inc.