> Did you try to read this tar-file with some other tar program? ... >... such as GNU tar 1.12? Same result. >> Looks like gcc 2.8.1. >Gee. That's dead broken. ... Yeah, yeah. But you're just a wee bit biased :-) :-). >First thing I'd do would be to get GNU tar >1.13.19 built with a newer compiler. ... So what's the recommended **stable** gcc these days? I'll try to scrounge up the 100+ MBytes and CPU hours it takes to build and give that a try. >Alexandre Oliva John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: Linux and dump Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Linux and dump Dan Wilder
- Re: Linux and dump Gerhard den Hollander
- Re: Linux and dump Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Linux and dump Dan Wilder
- Re: Linux and dump Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Linux and dump John R. Jackson
- Re: Linux and dump Bernhard R. Erdmann
- Re: Linux and dump Mitch Collinsworth
- Re: Linux and dump Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Linux and dump John R. Jackson
- Re: Linux and dump Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Linux and dump Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Linux and dump Jean-Louis Martineau
- Re: Linux and dump Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Linux and dump Ray Shaw
- Re: Linux and dump John R. Jackson
- Re: Linux and dump Dan Wilder