Re: tar -I incompatibility
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 11:43:10AM -0500, Neal H Walfield wrote:
> I think that your argument is equivalent to someone complaining that
> unstable is broken. Of course it is, nothing has been finalized and it
> is, by definition, unstable. If you want stability, use the released
> version, not unstable or code in CVS, otherwise, realize that our first
> instincts are not always correct.
NO. NO. NO. I've already heard it and I won't accept it. The so-called
stable version of tar has *serious known bugs*. If upstream will not
accept the responsibility of periodically updating tar with bug fixes,
they must assume that people will follow the so-called unstable
Maybe, just maybe, upstream's instincts are wrong on the matter of -I
also. Maybe, just maybe, if we hadn't followed upstream into using -I
rather than -y we wouldn't be having a problem. Maybe we should just
yank out -I and wait for upstream to catch up.
Is there any guarantee that if we switch to -j it won't change again?