On Mittwoch, 26. September 2007, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Neil Bothwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:34:41 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> >> What does this have to do with GNU tar and it adding superflous
> >> options? Quite a lot. -j et.al. are non-standard options. If a
On Wednesday 26 September 2007 10:59:00 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > Pardon? "tar xf somefile" doesn't do any compression at all.
> > I don't get what you mean.
>
> No, but it does do whatever decompression is required. Of course, you do
> have to specify a compression method when creating a compressed
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 10:45:51 +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> > Either way requires that you first determine the type of compression
> > used before you can decide where to pipe tar's output, if at all.
> > Whereas something like "tar xf somefile" avoids the need to do" file
> > somefile" and parse
Hello Alexander Skwar,
> Yes, it's very bad that Gentoo scripts don't limit themselves to
> POSIX. Another windmill to fight against.
Artificially limiting yourself to the lowest common denominator when
better options are available is bad, and discourages evolution. POSIX
specifies the minimum s
Alexander Skwar schrieb:
> Florian Philipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Alexander Skwar schrieb:
>>> Florian Philipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
star supports p7zip which can be much better and especially more
flexible than bzip2, gzip and zip.
>>> Uhm, what's bad about
>>>
>>>
Alexander Skwar ha scritto:
> Stroller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On 24 Sep 2007, at 09:30, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>>> ...
and if p7zip supports pipes, you don't need its support in tar.
Just pipe
from/to it.
>>> It does and that's the way it's supposed to be used on unix, acco
6 matches
Mail list logo
