Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 00:39 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 21:55 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
[...]
Even after it has extracted everything you
asked for, tar will continue to the end of the archive looking for a
possible later version of one
On 06/10/2010 04:50 PM, Mike McCarty wrote:
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On further reflexion and a close reading of info tar, we find the
following:
`--occurrence[=NUMBER]'
This option can be used in conjunction with one of the subcommands
`--delete', `--diff', `--extract' or
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 19:51 -0400, Bob Goodwin wrote:
On 08/06/10 19:26, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 18:15 -0400, Bob Goodwin wrote:
Yes, and this is essentially what I did except I tar'd the entire
/home/bobg/ directory into one big lump. My question was
Bob Goodwin wrote:
On 07/06/10 19:21, Mike McCarty wrote:
Either you have a broken tar, or you aren't using it right. It's
intended to work that way, and has always worked that way.
Sorry, I misunderstood his response to my question.
No apology needed. I didn't mean that to sound gruff.
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Without looking at the source code one can't be sure, but I'd be
surprised if that were literally true. IOW I doubt that tar decompresses
everything to a temp file and then searches for the target. It should
I know that it does not, as I've done that sort of thing
Rick Stevens wrote:
The j option tells tar to use bzip2 instead of gzip. It compresses
tighter, at a commensurate increase in CPU load.
It compresses _some_ files more than gzip. IME, most files.
It's easy to prove that there is some file which bzip makes
larger than the original, and that's
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 00:39 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 21:55 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
There is no way other than linear search to find a file in a tar
archive, so tar always has to read** from the beginning of the archive
until it comes to a file you want.
On Wednesday 09 June 2010 11:13 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 00:39 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 21:55 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
There is no way other than linear search to find a file in a tar
archive, so tar always has to read** from the
Ed Greshko wrote:
On 06/09/2010 10:30 AM, g wrote:
what do you do if archive file gets broken?
In the past 10+ years that has not happened. If it does, I'll let you
know what I did. FWIW, I always compress my archive files.
may you continue to be blessed with such good fortune.
post it
On 06/10/2010 09:20 AM, g wrote:
Ed Greshko wrote:
On 06/09/2010 10:30 AM, g wrote:
what do you do if archive file gets broken?
In the past 10+ years that has not happened. If it does, I'll let you
know what I did. FWIW, I always compress my archive files.
may
On 06/09/2010 01:13 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 00:39 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 21:55 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
There is no way other than linear search to find a file in a tar
archive, so tar always has to read** from the beginning of
Ed Greshko wrote:
On 06/10/2010 09:20 AM, g wrote:
Ed Greshko wrote:
On 06/09/2010 10:30 AM, g wrote:
what do you do if archive file gets broken?
In the past 10+ years that has not happened. If it does, I'll let you
know what I did. FWIW, I always compress my archive
On 06/09/2010 09:55 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 06/10/2010 09:20 AM, g wrote:
Ed Greshko wrote:
On 06/09/2010 10:30 AM, g wrote:
what do you do if archive file gets broken?
In the past 10+ years that has not happened. If it does, I'll let you
know what I did. FWIW, I always compress my
Robert Nichols wrote:
snip
Not so much fun that I'd care to try it again, though.
i agree about 'Not so much fun', but you were lucky and had data to put
back in.
when i learned trick i described, restoring from backup was necessary to
recover a unix system that had one of it's drives crash.
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 17:57 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 15:08 -0700, jack craig wrote:
it only makes sense, zip deflated the individual files and tar is
ignorance of that requirement.
hence the untar, then unzip.
[Please don't top-post on this list. See the
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 08:30 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote:
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 17:57 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 15:08 -0700, jack craig wrote:
it only makes sense, zip deflated the individual files and tar is
ignorance of that requirement.
hence the untar,
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 10:16 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
You man have
to say:
tar xvzf bobg.tar.gz ./bobg/foo or maybe foo is not at the top of
the
directory.
Any Unix/Linux app that manipulates files clearly has to refer to them
with pathnames. It hardly seems necessary to
Me, too!
How about the j option?
On 06/08/2010 03:50 PM, Aaron Konstam wrote:
Again when you are right you are right. I never noticed that the z in
tar is optional. Thanks, I learned something.
--
===
One of the worst of
On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 15:55:25 -0500,
Dale J. Chatham d...@chatham.org wrote:
Me, too!
How about the j option?
When extracting tar figures out whether or not compression is used and what
type of compression. So you don't need to use the z or j options when
extracting. When creating an
On 06/08/2010 03:50 PM, Aaron Konstam wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 10:16 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
You man have
to say:
tar xvzf bobg.tar.gz ./bobg/foo or maybe foo is not at the top of
the
directory.
Any Unix/Linux app that manipulates files clearly has to refer to them
with
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 15:55 -0500, Dale J. Chatham wrote:
Me, too!
You too what? Oh, I see you're top-posting. Please don't do that.
How about the j option?
Why don't you just try it? I've no idea and don't really care as I use
gzip in these situations. Tell us what you discover.
poc
--
On 07/06/10 19:24, Mike McCarty wrote:
Bob Goodwin wrote:
Here's how it's supposed to work...
[jmcca...@presario-1 KT-135]$ mkdir check-tar
[jmcca...@presario-1 KT-135]$ cd check-tar
[jmcca...@presario-1 check-tar]$ cp -p ../MVC* .
[jmcca...@presario-1 check-tar]$ ls
MVC-001S.JPG
On 06/08/2010 03:10 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 15:55 -0500, Dale J. Chatham wrote:
Me, too!
You too what? Oh, I see you're top-posting. Please don't do that.
How about the j option?
Why don't you just try it? I've no idea and don't really care as I use
gzip in
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 18:15 -0400, Bob Goodwin wrote:
Yes, and this is essentially what I did except I tar'd the entire
/home/bobg/ directory into one big lump. My question was could I
go in and unzip individual files. It seems that can't be done easily.
You don't seem to have grokked the
Bob Goodwin wrote:
snip
I don't think I can paint myself into a corner? I usually do though!
if you leave everything in one file, you just might.
as i mentioned before, what if such a large file gets corrupt in places?
--
peace out.
tc,hago.
g
.
in a free world without fences, who
On Tuesday 08 June 2010 04:26 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 18:15 -0400, Bob Goodwin wrote:
Yes, and this is essentially what I did except I tar'd the entire
/home/bobg/ directory into one big lump. My question was could I
go in and unzip individual files. It seems
On 08/06/10 19:26, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 18:15 -0400, Bob Goodwin wrote:
Yes, and this is essentially what I did except I tar'd the entire
/home/bobg/ directory into one big lump. My question was could I
go in and unzip individual files. It seems that can't
Suvayu Ali wrote:
snip
I think the only solution in this case is to do
$ gunzip bobg.tar.gz
and keep the resulting bobg.tar file in some easy to access area. A
subsequent
$ tar xf bobg.tar /path/to/my/file
should be fast and easy to do.
regardless of op's desire, there is no fast
On 08/06/10 19:36, Suvayu Ali wrote:
On Tuesday 08 June 2010 04:26 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 18:15 -0400, Bob Goodwin wrote:
Yes, and this is essentially what I did except I tar'd the entire
/home/bobg/ directory into one big lump. My question was
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 16:36 -0700, Suvayu Ali wrote:
To extract only a specific file:
$ tar xf bobg.tar.gz the/file/you/want
I think the OP's worry is not whether it can be done, but he wants to
avoid the time and CPU cycles involved in the gunzip step. Since he
has his entire home
On 06/09/2010 08:46 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 16:36 -0700, Suvayu Ali wrote:
To extract only a specific file:
$ tar xf bobg.tar.gz the/file/you/want
I think the OP's worry is not whether it can be done, but he wants to
avoid the time and CPU cycles
Ed Greshko wrote:
snip
I don't know about anyone else here But if I have a large tar archive
I include as the first file in the archive a ls of what is in the
archive.
+1
i have a script for cpio'ing that concatenates into a sub directory of;
pwd, du -sb *, ls -Ar to a file named
On 06/08/2010 07:46 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 16:36 -0700, Suvayu Ali wrote:
To extract only a specific file:
$ tar xf bobg.tar.gz the/file/you/want
I think the OP's worry is not whether it can be done, but he wants to
avoid the time and CPU cycles involved in the
On 06/09/2010 10:30 AM, g wrote:
what do you do if archive file gets broken?
In the past 10+ years that has not happened. If it does, I'll let you
know what I did. FWIW, I always compress my archive files.
--
Law stands mute in the midst of arms. -- Marcus Tullius Cicero 葛斯克 愛
德華 /
On 06/08/2010 06:51 PM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
On 08/06/10 19:26, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 18:15 -0400, Bob Goodwin wrote:
Yes, and this is essentially what I did except I tar'd the entire
/home/bobg/ directory into one big lump. My question was could I
go in and
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 21:55 -0500, Robert Nichols wrote:
There is no way other than linear search to find a file in a tar
archive, so tar always has to read** from the beginning of the archive
until it comes to a file you want.
IIRC for uncompressed tarballs this is not strictly the case. The
I have /home/bobg/ tar'd to bobg.tar.gz. Can I extract individual
files or directories without unzipping the entire 17 gigs?
Bob
--
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
i'd say no, the zip file would need to be extracted en-total, then unzipped.
lets see if some clever soul can prove me wrong? :)
On 06/07/2010 02:48 PM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
I have /home/bobg/ tar'd to bobg.tar.gz. Can I extract individual
files or directories without unzipping the
tar -xzvf bobg.tar.gz file_to_extract
man tar is your friend...
Le 07/06/10 23:48, Bob Goodwin a écrit :
I have /home/bobg/ tar'd to bobg.tar.gz. Can I extract individual
files or directories without unzipping the entire 17 gigs?
Bob
--
--
users mailing list
On 6/7/2010 5:48 PM, Bob Goodwin wrote:
I have /home/bobg/ tar'd to bobg.tar.gz. Can I extract individual
files or directories without unzipping the entire 17 gigs?
As a GUI function - I can't speak for KDE.
With Gnome. Open the folder that contains the tar.gz.
double click the
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 15:08 -0700, jack craig wrote:
it only makes sense, zip deflated the individual files and tar is
ignorance of that requirement.
hence the untar, then unzip.
[Please don't top-post on this list. See the Guidelines.]
There is nothing in the OP's message to indicate how
On 07/06/10 18:08, jack craig wrote:
it only makes sense, zip deflated the individual files and tar is
ignorance of that requirement.
hence the untar, then unzip.
you might consider
$tar czvf /tmp/bob.tar.gz /home/bobg/
then each file is compressed by tar on the way to the tarball.
i
Bob Goodwin wrote:
I have /home/bobg/ tar'd to bobg.tar.gz. Can I extract individual
files or directories without unzipping the entire 17 gigs?
It depends on how you created the archive, and what you mean
by unzipping the entire. The usual way to do this with
tar is either to use one of
Bob Goodwin wrote:
On 07/06/10 18:08, jack craig wrote:
it only makes sense, zip deflated the individual files and tar is
ignorance of that requirement.
hence the untar, then unzip.
you might consider
$tar czvf /tmp/bob.tar.gz /home/bobg/
then each file is compressed by tar on the way
Bob Goodwin wrote:
Here's how it's supposed to work...
[jmcca...@presario-1 KT-135]$ mkdir check-tar
[jmcca...@presario-1 KT-135]$ cd check-tar
[jmcca...@presario-1 check-tar]$ cp -p ../MVC* .
[jmcca...@presario-1 check-tar]$ ls
MVC-001S.JPG MVC-008S.JPG MVC-012S.JPG MVC-017S.JPG
On 07/06/10 18:27, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 15:08 -0700, jack craig wrote:
it only makes sense, zip deflated the individual files and tar is
ignorance of that requirement.
hence the untar, then unzip.
[Please don't top-post on this list. See the
46 matches
Mail list logo
