> cpio ? > > It does the job of both tar and gzip. Try an :- > > info cpio
I am familiar with cpio, but as I said, I was hoping for a format that does not contain usernames and other metainformation that is not necessary for software distribution. I believe cpio is meant for backups is it not? I don't believe a format meant for backups is a great thing to use for software distribution. > As for the Linux Kernel archives, I do not really think there is enough > justification for a change in distribution format. Right, well I did take the thread my own way, and am posing this as a more general question on software distribution. Certainly I don't know of another format at this point that would be a better way to distribute it, and the original poster's concerns probably don't have a major impact on most people. > Most kernel coders either use non root account for untar'ing and making > the kernel and do a 'sudo make install' anyway. Well, the whole idea that having to use a non-root account to unpack some files has always been rediculous to me. Sure, given the way tar behaves, it is insane not to, but for a software distribution tool, making this a requirement is pretty lame. Changing tar's behavior to be safer is possible, but would likely degrade the ability of tar to be a good backup tool. The use cases for each type of tool are simply different. thanks for your response, tim _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
