From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Apr 9 16: 6: 0 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from resnet.uoregon.edu (resnet.uoregon.edu [128.223.144.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C38D14C0E for ; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 16:05:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu) Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost) by resnet.uoregon.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA10232; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 16:03:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 16:03:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White To: chris@calldei.com Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GNU tar In-Reply-To: <19990408220109.B31135@holly.dyndns.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Chris Costello wrote: > I've been thinking about it, and I have to ask why GNU tar was > included with the FreeBSD system as the default tar(1) utility. > Wouldn't including the tar distributed with BSD be a better > choice, since it's a bit more portable, and perhaps have the GNU > tar availible as gtar, or as a port, starting in -CURRENT? The BSD tar is simply unusuable in most standard contexts, and the GNU tar is the defacto Internet standard. The only reason BSD tar exists is to get GNU tar. :-) I just got bit by this on MacOS X Server -- the default 'tar' is the crappy BSD one, while the GNU tar is 'gnutar' and handles long filenames properly. I moved the old tar out of the way, symlinked the gnutar to tar, and will be happy for the rest of my days. Doug White Internet: dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite | www.freebsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message