[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#174308: star should become standard tar

On Thu, 26 Dec 2002 bug1@optushome.com.au wrote:

> GNU tar should not be seen as the the standard, POSIX should be.

Long names suck in POSIX-tar.

> Its wrong for STAR to emulate bugs in GNU tar's behaviour.

What bugs would those be?

> I think its wrong to judge it by popularity, consider standards and
> technical merit as well.
> GNU tar uses its own NON-POSIX method of storing filenames greater than
> 100 bytes, it doesnt use the 155 byte 'path' section of the header at
> all!

Er, it's not posix, that's true, but is perfectly compatible with the tar
format.  POSIX long-name handling itself has bugs.  The longest name storable
in a POSIX tar is either 255 or 256, depending on where '/' lands.

> GNU tar has been a good program for a long time, its method of storing
> long files predates the POSIX tar standard, but we shouldnt be held back
> due to nostalga.

Well, pax is no better.

I've got code that handles sysv-tar, gnu-tar, and posix-tar, for long name
handling.  This feature seems to be the most requested one over all others.

Reply to: