Joerg Schilling wrote: > James Carlson <[email protected]> wrote: >> GNU tar is needed for Linux compatibility. Like it or not, there are a >> lot of GNU/Linux machines out there, and being able to read and write >> their files is pretty much a minimum requirement for a modern OS. > > Star implements a GNU tar CLI compatibility mode. Did you ever test this? > And star reads back _more_ archives written by GNU tar that the original > GNU tar does.
As a user, I'd really rather have real GNU tar than something written for "compatibility mode." I'm sure you did your level best to make it work as well as GNU tar, but what's the benefit to me -- a user -- in having something else? > So please explaint me for what purpose you need an original GNU tar binary. Because it's the same across all of the machines I need to use. "star" isn't installed by default on anything I use day-to-day, but GNU tar most often is. >> pax has a similar argument. > > Which one? The one that's always come with Solaris. >> With all of those, it's unclear to many why anyone would really need yet >> another tar. Of course, if someone wants to integrate it anyway, I see >> no particular barrier to doing so. There's just no real need, so I can >> understand a lack of urgency. > > I se a lack of significance in what has been done in the past. As a user, I don't have much invested in "star." I need GNU tar to read and write files from Linux, but my interest wanes after that point. Even if someone introduced an all-singing all-dancing archiver, I doubt I'd download it, because the ones I have are more than sufficient for the task. -- James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
