On Thursday 16 June 2005 10:38, G. Roderick Singleton wrote: >On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 10:20 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: >> On Thursday 16 June 2005 09:32, G. Roderick Singleton wrote: >> >On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 15:12 -0700, OldSarge wrote: > >[snipped] > >> > 4. If the latter in 3, enter rpm -qa tar\* on the >> > commandline. This will tell you if the utility is installed. >> > Output should look something like this: tar-1.14-4 >> > >> >From our experiences while running the backup program amanda, I >> >> believe thats a known bad version of tar. Known good versions are >> 1.13-19, 1.13-25, and 1.15-1. > >Why thankyou, Gene. Interesting but beside the point.
Off topic even :) >I said > "something like" so as not to be specific. Please contact Old Sarge > on specifics. Well, occasionally somebody is gonna beat their head bloody trying to figure out why the unpack doesn't & only later find they have an incompatible version of tar. Amanda uses tar to do the dirty work, and when a new tar comes out, we'll grab it and put it under the hot lights to test its compatibility with all its older bretheren before a preacher can say amen. I just figure the publicity is good if it prevents an instance of brow beating. I now return you to the regularly scheduled programming. :-) > >[snipped] -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
