Subject: Re: pax-as-tar extract to stdout patch
To: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
From: Bill Studenmund <email@example.com>
Date: 06/17/2003 20:55:24
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, der Mouse wrote:
> > Both 'tar' and 'cpio' as command-line interfaces were as good as dead
> > essentially _before_ POSIX got off the ground -- they've been long
> > dead ever since!
> I for one sure find tar awfully useful for a dead interface. (Perhaps
> it helps to have an implementation I can trust.)
I definitely concur. Until just a few years ago, I'd never used pax, and
thought it was the dead one. While non-gtar tar may be dead, gtar
certainly has breathed live into the "tar" family.
> > [...extract to stdout...]
> > However this ability is restricted to a very tiny number of 'tar'
> > implementations (two as far as I know, at least until this feature
> > was proposed for NetBSD's new implementation),
> Is mine one of them? If not, make that three. :-)
Given that one of these implementations is gtar (assuming I understand
things right), counting the number of implementations doesn't matter.
Given its market share, it probably covers most (if not almost all) of the
archive creation & extraction performed that uses tar format files.
Just because we can extract to temporary directories doesn't mean we
shouldn't also support this. UNIX has often let people do things multiple