>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jun 18 19:02:12 2002
>> If you only use tar x or tar c, and don't know what else is supported you
>> believe that GNU tar is sufficient.
>Hmm, I almost never have used any more than that. Tar never seems like
>the solution when needing more than that. Perhaps that is just the way
>GNU tar is then.
Tar _is_ the best basic idea for everything that comes with archive/transport
of files. With the new POSIX.1-2001 extensions, you can expand it to do
anything you like without breaking compatibility.
I never use GNU tar volountarily, it just creates too many compatbibility
problems. I cannot trust a TAR implementation that sometimes leaves out a few
files when extracting archives.
I never used anything than star since 1985 if I had the choice. The problems I
frequently see with GNU tar never occured with star.
>> Instead for unknown reasons, vendors put the non-standard compliant GNu tar on.
>> Is it really that Linux people dislike standards as much as M$ does?
>I didn't know that tar was an actual defined standard. It makes sense
>to have one, but I never thought about it before.
Tar has been finally standardized the first time in 1988. This was _before_
FSF people took it and indroduced non standard extensions. The PD tar GNU tar
was baes on implemented a true subset of the standard, FSF people introduced
incompatibilities....
>> - Star has a lot of features I use every day that are missing in
>> GNU tar. If people start using star on a daily base they never will
>> use GNu tar anymore because it lacks important things that make life
>> easier.
>Other than ACLs, what nice features does it have that you use regularly?
>I might learn something useful here.
Why don't you first read STARvsGNUTAR?
>> - GNUtar does not do a good job with incremental dumps because it uses
>> a badly defined media format. Star will be the first program that
>> gives the same or more than you get with ufsdump/ufsrestore.
>> Star will do this portable and OS/FS independant.
>I haven't done any incremental tar files. Never seemed to go well with
>compressed tar files.
If you install amanda (a lot of people seem to do this) then you use GNU tar
without knowing. Compression is irrelevant with incremental dumps.
>> - GNUtar gives many compatibility problems because it ignores standards.
>> Note that GNU tar has been started in 1989 from PD tar aka. SUG tar
>> and still ignores even POSIX.1-1988. Star implements POSIX.1-2001 for
>> 10 months now.
>Well I mostly extract tar files, and they seem to have come out OK.
>Any tar I have made has probably been for my own use.
One reason may be that these files haven't been TAR files but GNUtar files.
Read README.otherbugs for a list of frequent problems. Unfortunately more
projects today need more then 100 chars for filenames and GNUtar does not
handle them the standard way.
>> For sake, many users are force to change now ;-0
>>
>> Star is the only backup tool on Linux that allows to archive ACLs.
>ACLs as in what XFS and a few other filesystems have in addition to the
>standard old rwxrwxrwx/uid/gid stuff?
I believe that XFA does not implement ACLs, see e.g. acl.bestbits.at for ACL on
Linux help. Linux is late... any decent OS implements them for 7+ years.
>Hmm, interesting. May be worth considering.
>apt-get install star. All done. :) I wonder if 1.5a02 is fairly up
>to date.
Why do you use an outdated version when there is a newer one out for one day?
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]
