On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 01:06:49PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Paul Rogers wrote: > > I tried testing that "LANG" bug by exporting "LANG=C" before rerunning > > the compressed tar, but it failed the same way. Perhaps it had to be > > defined when tar was made? I didn't think that's what was implied. But > > if I was going to have to rebuild tar, well, I decided to blow it all > > away and start over from scratch, using tar-1.28, which caused no > > problems with the LFS-7.7 host build. Did that and came back to my > > first script in Ch6 to make and tarball (compressed) the bare, clean > > FHS. No problems! I'm blaming tar-1.29. I stopped here for the time > > being, I've a doctor's appointment to go off to. I'll try the rest of > > CH6 this evening--should be good for a couple hours of grinding. > > If the problem is tar-1.29, why does it work perfectly for all the editors? > There is nothing special in a disk utility like this that is processor or > system dependent. > > LFS-8.0 has been out for about two months. If there was a problem, > certainly we would have heard about it before now. > > -- Bruce > Paul has a different use-case for tar:
He is feeding his package manager a file of what to archive (I had to read the man page because I had never come across the option he mentioned). If I ever tar things up, it is normally a complete filesystem (or an rsync copy of one), so I just point tar at the root and get everything. For me, package management is a wholly manual process - I _hope_ to capture everything which is installed, but from time to time with perl modules I get the feeling I'm missing files (as in "nothing was recorded"). I also get false positives for other files on a running system which were updated while a package was being built and installed. But then I rarely need to uninstall, my filesystems are usually big enough for what I add during their life. Package management is always a pain, what I have is adequate for me. Paul has different needs and he seems to be exploring less-used tar options. ĸen -- Error: ( : 1) not enough arguments Don't you just love Tiny scheme ? -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
