From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 8 18:00:33 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E78F516A41F for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 18:00:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from garys@opusnet.com) Received: from opusnet.com (mail.opusnet.com [209.210.200.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 977E143D48 for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 18:00:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from garys@opusnet.com) Received: from localhost.localhost [70.98.246.232] by opusnet.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.05) id AC3D399600F2; Thu, 08 Sep 2005 11:00:29 -0700 Received: from localhost.localhost (localhost.localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localhost (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j88I2YTO081962; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 11:02:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from garys@opusnet.com) Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localhost (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j88I2TJa081961; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 11:02:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from garys@opusnet.com) To: "Gary W. Swearingen" References: <200509081521.j88FL8N3085702@aristotle.tamu.edu> <20050908171835.GC14196@holestein.holy.cow> From: garys@opusnet.com (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 11:02:29 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20050908171835.GC14196@holestein.holy.cow> (parv@pair.com's message of "Thu, 8 Sep 2005 13:18:35 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.17 (Jumbo Shrimp, berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-RBL-Warning: WEIGHT10: Total weight between 10 and 14. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: SPAMDOMAINS, SPFf, WEIGHT10 [11] Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tarring a dump. Problems with a pipe X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 18:00:34 -0000 Parv writes: > In this context, by "bzip" did you actually meant "bzip2"? (There > is a archivers/bzip port.) No, I presented bzip2-labeled test results and then made statements about archivers/bzip. But I suppose they're true about "bzip2" too.