So sprach [EMAIL PROTECTED] am Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 12:34:52PM +0200:
> to use star instead of GNU tar. Star produces (in default mode) archives that
> are readable with all tar implementations except GNUtar. In addition, star
Darn, I didn't want to say anything to this anymore - but: If star produces
archives that are not readable by the biggest number of tar installation
(ie. GNU tar), than star is broken, although it may be POSIX compliant.
Like it, or not, but GNU tar is the de-facto standard, even if it's not
POSIX compliant. If it's such a huge problem to *YOU* that GNUtar is not
POSIX compliant, then the only choice is, that *YOU* make it compliant.
Obiously nobody else seems to care that much about it, else it would have
been fixed already.
> star is the program with the highest portability _and_ star ports at least
> to the same number of platforms as GNU tar does.
Yes, but star doesn't come with *ANY* Linux distribution - at least with
none of the major distributions (Mandrake, RedHat, Debian, SuSE). So it
simply doesn't matter if star is better or not.
> days and it seems that all member in this mailing list are more interested
> in repeating false arguments pro GNUtar and against star than in cdrecord.
Because the arguments are not as false as you want to make everybody
believe. There maybe some small glitches in GNUtar - but you have to deal
with it, since it's the most often used tar implementation.
I didn't want to say anything anymore, but if you are writing so extremely
provoking sentences like you just did, it's no wonder that a meta-discussion
about tar implementations lives so long.
Alexander Skwar
--
How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english)
Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com | http://www.iso-top.de
iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen
Uptime: 0 hours 46 minutes
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
