From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Jun 23 21:44:19 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA24439 for freebsd-stable-outgoing; Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:44:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA24379 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:43:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA08864; Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:44:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) To: Tom cc: Martin Blapp , "freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG" , Tim Vanderhoek Subject: Re: GNU-Tar should be updated In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 23 Jun 1998 17:26:01 PDT." Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:44:06 -0700 Message-ID: <8861.898663446@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > tar is an add-on, and is not the standard backup tool, dump/restore is. > dump/restore have their own problems, but backing up /dev is not one of > them. > > Besides, some think that all GNU tars should be replaced with star which > is much faster. Plus star generates real posix archives. What people probably aren't realizing (and this is actually a good argument for honestly *looking* at code which you propose to replace first :-) is that FreeBSD's current tar isn't a stock GNU tar, it's GNU tar with features like --fast-read added (just to name one extention off the top of my head). If you were to just replace our tar with a stock one, tools like pkg_add would suddenly refuse to work. :-) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message