> > gtar xvfz filename.tar.bz2
> 
> gtar jxfz ;)
> 
> > 
> > which will not even work (GNU, implementing tools
> > inside of other tools, stifling flexibility)
> > 
> > or
> > 
> > gtar xvfz filename.tar.gz
> > 
> > which is directly dependent on the GNU toolchain
> > (aka a perfect example of your "if all I have is a
> > hammer..." statement).
> > 
> > And that was just a *trivial* example.
> 
> I love it when Linux users bash Solaris about having
> to pipe and Solaris users bash gtar as non-portable.
> You can get BOTH.

Ignoring for a moment that gtar is problematic except for that convenience
(just don't get Joerg started on that subject :-)
even if one could have both, anyone who wrote a script dependent
on gtar when they didn't have to should IMO be made an example of in
the same way as a certain dictator was (I'm thinking it was too bad
he was dead when he got hung on the meat hook).

Besides, gtar was in /usr/sfw/bin since at least Solaris 10; with the /usr/gnu
thing, I suppose it would end up in there as tar (vomit) with a link in /usr/bin
as gtar.  So you can have your perversion, as long as you don't expect anyone
else to use it.
 
 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to