Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 11:09:20 +0200 From: Matthias Andree <ma@dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de> To: "David G. Lawrence" <dg@dglawrence.com> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: tar -l is now (intentionally) broken. Message-ID: <m3k6wg4mgv.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> In-Reply-To: <20040803080247.GI42525@nexus.dglawrence.com> (David G. Lawrence's message of "Tue, 3 Aug 2004 01:02:47 -0700") References: <410F28E1.8080105@freebsd.org> <20040803072859.GA944@isis.wad.cz> <20040803080247.GI42525@nexus.dglawrence.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"David G. Lawrence" <dg@dglawrence.com> writes: >> # kientzle@freebsd.org / 2004-08-02 22:55:45 -0700: >> > Since POSIX and GNU violently disagree about the >> > meaning of "tar -l", and there seem to be strong >> > adherents to both interpretations, I'm preparing to >> > commit a patch that breaks "tar -l" for everyone: >> >> All I can see is three posts in current@, that's >> not much of a discussion (or voting). >> >> I for one, would prefer POSIX compliance. :) > > Well, '-l' has meant "local filesystem only" in FreeBSD since the 1.0 > release (i.e. since the beginning - more than 10 years now). FreeBSD isn't > a POSIX OS - it's a BSD OS and we have many differences in our user > environment that differ from POSIX. That's partly what makes us BSD rather > than System V, Solaris, or Linux. Many of our users prefer the way that ps(1) > works in BSD, for example...as well as many other non-POSIXisms in other > utilities. Talking of Solaris, it still has a nonconforming /bin/sh, and such is a major annoyance in heteogenous networks. Same applies to FreeBSD, please lean towards standards wherever possible. As this BSD tar stuff is a -CURRENT issue, it is allowed to break. -- Matthias Andree Encrypted mail welcome: my GnuPG key ID is 0x052E7D95 (PGP/MIME preferred)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m3k6wg4mgv.fsf>