Re: bin/46142: The cpio(1), pax(1) and tar(1) manpages need improvement

[Marc Balmer <mbalmer%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

Am 04.03.12 16:05, schrieb Thomas Klausner:

[...]

>  > Index: bin/pax/tar.c
>  > ===================================================================
>  > RCS file: /cvsroot/src/bin/pax/tar.c,v
>  > retrieving revision 1.68
>  > diff -u -r1.68 tar.c
>  > --- bin/pax/tar.c  3 Nov 2011 21:59:45 -0000       1.68
>  > +++ bin/pax/tar.c  4 Mar 2012 14:27:43 -0000
>  > @@ -100,12 +100,12 @@
>  >  static const char LONG_LINK[] = "././@LongLink";
>  >  
>  >  #ifdef _PAX_
>  > -char DEV_0[] = "/dev/rst0";
>  > -char DEV_1[] = "/dev/rst1";
>  > -char DEV_4[] = "/dev/rst4";
>  > -char DEV_5[] = "/dev/rst5";
>  > -char DEV_7[] = "/dev/rst7";
>  > -char DEV_8[] = "/dev/rst8";
>  > +char DEV_0[] = "/dev/nrst0";
>  > +char DEV_1[] = "/dev/nrst1";
>  > +char DEV_4[] = "/dev/nrst4";
>  > +char DEV_5[] = "/dev/nrst5";
>  > +char DEV_7[] = "/dev/nrst7";
>  > +char DEV_8[] = "/dev/nrst8";
>  >  #endif
>  >  
>  >  static int
>  
>  Can someone please confirm if this patch is ok?

I don't understand why this change is requested or why it should be
good.  The only difference is that rstX are rewinding tape devices and
nrstX are non-rewinding tapes (they rewind on close).