>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 13 14:55:48 2001
>> As you can see, the files are identical, although tar was not able to list
>> them.
>>
>> Further, I tried your mk and mk2 scripts with tar and star. You are right,
>> star is able to process file names which are not POSIX conformant while tar
>> fails on those files.
>>
>> Conclusion (for me): Nothing bad at all. While GNU tar has problems with
>> very long file names and also fails to list a POSIX correct tar archive,
>> it's nothing I'd worry about. As long as files are extracted correctly, I'm
>> fine.
>
>Yes, I have also noticed that star creates files with portability
>problems. For that reason I avoid using it for backups, which I might
>have to use on machines without star.
GNU tar is _the_ program with portability problems! This is the fact.
The bad result of this fact is that Sun is using more and more *.zip archives
beacause people are using GNU tar, are unwilling to accept that there
is a GNu tar compatibility problem and complain about exptraction
problems....
>Regardless of what you use for backup, be it tar or programs designed
>from scratch for backup like 'dump', for software distribution I want
>portability over conformance to standards. If the distribution doesn't
>work it won't be used, regardless of pedantic conformance to standards.
Sou you should decide to avoid GNU tar...
J�rg
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) J�rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
