"Chris H" <bsd-li...@bsdforge.com> writes:
>> On 8/26/14 11:05 AM, Chris H wrote:
>>> I'm currently testing 11. My build / install is from about 2 days ago.
>>> I generally use xz compression, when creating archives. But when I
>>> attempt the following:
>>> tar -cvJ --options xz:9 -f ./archive-name.tar.xz ./file
>>> it returns the following:
>>> tar: Undefined option: `xz:9'
>>> This has always worked in previous versions. Has the syntax changed,
>>> and the man(1) pages just haven't caught up?
>> I use:
>> tar -cJ --options xz:compression-level=1
>> .. on head. Are you using the right syntax?
> Apparently not. Using your example works as expected.
> RELENG_8, and RELENG_9 use short-hand;
> tar -cvJ --options xz:9
> Why/when the change to long-hand? Seems a shame. Now I
> get to modify all my scripts, and such. :P Altho I
> don't suppose it'd be a big deal to back out (revert) the
> changes made to tar(1). :)
I can't find any changes that would make the syntax change. At least,
not in quite a long while. Therefore, this change may not be
intentional. However, I looked at the the manual page from 9.3, and its
description of the features looks the same as on the latest HEAD, and
*doesn't* look like leaving out a "key" (in this case,
"compression-level") is ever compliant.
You might try the latest (or older) libarchive from the ports, and
compare its behaviour. Also, there are a number (amusingly many, in
fact) of other ways of specifying these parameters that may be more
convenient for you, so another look throught the tar(1) manual might
save you a few minutes.
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"