pax is already covered, too. We only have to do the ARC case. Olga
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:13:10AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: >> "Garrett D'Amore" <gdamore at Sun.COM> wrote: >> >> > It would be interesting to survey the closed-bins and find out how many >> > of those were still required to build open source ON. I wonder how much >> > closer this case will bring us? It certainly can't *hurt*. :-) >> >> I am still wondering why some cases are considered and other much older cases >> such as replacing pax by the "pax"-CLI from star seems to be completely >> ignored. Isn't this something that should change? > > At the risk of setting fire to something, I think that's still awaiting > someone > to do that work, isn't it? > > If replacing pax is very important, I'd be willing to port FreeBSD's > libarchive [1] and frontends. I suspect that it is not, though. > > Ceri > > [1] http://code.google.com/p/libarchive/ > -- > That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all. > -- Moliere > -- , _ _ , { \/`o;====- Olga Kryzhanovska -====;o`\/ } .----'-/`-/ olga.kryzhanovska at gmail.com \-`\-'----. `'-..-| / Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer \ |-..-'` /\/\ /\/\ `--` `--`
