Miles Nordin <car...@ivy.net> wrote:
> >>>>> "tt" == Toby Thain <t...@telegraphics.com.au> writes:
>
> tt> I know this was discussed a while back, but in what sense does
> tt> tar do any of those things? I understand that it is unlikely
> tt> to barf completely on bitflips, but won't tar simply silently
> tt> de-archive bad data?
>
> yeah, I just tested it, and you're right. I guess the checksums are
> only for headers. However, cpio does store checksums for files'
> contents, so maybe it's better to use cpio than tar. Just be careful
> how you invoke it, because there are different cpio formats just like
> there are different tar formats, and some might have no or weaker
> checksum.
cpio is a deprecated archive format. As it is hard to enhance the features of
cpio without breaking archive compatibility, POSIX defines a standard archive
format that is based on tar and made very extensible.
BTW: if you are on ZFS, ZFS should prevent flipping bits in archives ;-)
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
