From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Nov 29 9:20:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mailhub.fokus.gmd.de (mailhub.fokus.gmd.de [193.174.154.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A35737B41E for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:20:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from beagle (beagle [193.175.132.100]) by mailhub.fokus.gmd.de (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fATHFKH10492; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 18:15:20 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 18:15:19 +0100 (CET) From: Harti Brandt To: Christian Weisgerber Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tar and nodump flag In-Reply-To: <9u5ied$1fjf$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> Message-ID: <20011129181421.M29843-100000@beagle.fokus.gmd.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Christian Weisgerber wrote: CW>Harti Brandt wrote: CW> CW>> Perhaps it makes sense to switch to star instead? The last version is CW>> Posix conform, supports extended headers and ACLs. According to the star CW>> developer (Joerg Schilling) GNU tar is severly broken. CW> CW>Unfortunately, star has it's own share of problems: CW> CW>- A highly idiosyncratic command syntax that is incompatible with CW> traditional tar syntax. I think this is a killer. Well, yes. CW>- It doesn't support incremental backups. That isn't a problem in CW> itself, but it's a feature our GNU tar currently has and people CW> probably don't want to lose. CW>- An idiosyncratic build system. I know that. I have a discussion every other day with the guy about how great it is :-) harti -- harti brandt, http://www.fokus.gmd.de/research/cc/cats/employees/hartmut.brandt/private brandt@fokus.fhg.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message