Re: Default tar for 1.3 and later

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 03:35:58PM +0200, Raphael Marmier wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> >On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 11:43:16AM +0200, Raphael Marmier wrote:
> >
> >>no more path length limitation in bsd tar?
> >
> >
> >Depends on the output format you choose. pax is not limited.
> 
> so it's maybe, maybe not? Why then bother defaulting back to bsd tar if 
> this will be creating problems where there weren't?

You can choose the output format. If you want ustar, you get ustar with
the path limit and the ability to use almost any tar out there.
You cannot do that with GNU tar. You know the typical recommendation?
Install GNU tar! Just because GNU tar is unmaintained and they never
fully implementation the portable archive format (just an early draft).

> On the other hand, of course, if those path problems have been fixed 
> (for tar archives), its another matter entirely.

The default is safe.

> But tar being used for stuff like backups, I consider the move with 
> anxiety. The default should point to a tool that don't have unexpected 
> behaviour, I insist.

Well, I consider GNU tar kind of unexpected too :) BTW, we are the only
BSD still using GNU tar (FreeBSD moved to BSD tar, Net and Open are using
the pax frontend).

Joerg