Re: Is GNU tar 1.13.25 still good with 2.5.0p2?
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Friday 18 August 2006 11:35, Toomas Aas wrote:
I'm planning to upgrade my Amanda server (currently 2.4.5) to 2.5.0p2.
I'm wondering whether GNU tar 1.13.25 is still officially considered a
good version, or is it absolutely required to upgrade to 1.15.1?
I noticed that when installing Amanda from FreeBSD ports, the
installation pulls in gtar from ports (archivers/gtar), which is
currently version 1.15.1. However, my FreeBSD 5.4 seems to include GNU
tar 1.13.25 installed with base FreeBSD system as /usr/bin/gtar and I
was thinking, maybe there is no need to have two gtars on my system?
BTW, I currently use dump for backups, so gtar is only used for indexes.
As near as I have been able to determine, they are interchangeable.
I've been using 1.15-1 since it came out. 1.13 plain, and any 1.14 will eat
your lunch however.
As Debian stable has 1.14-2.2, I guess there do exist good (patched)
versions...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say programmer or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Re: Is GNU tar 1.13.25 still good with 2.5.0p2?
On Saturday 19 August 2006 03:30, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Friday 18 August 2006 11:35, Toomas Aas wrote:
I'm planning to upgrade my Amanda server (currently 2.4.5) to 2.5.0p2.
I'm wondering whether GNU tar 1.13.25 is still officially considered
a good version, or is it absolutely required to upgrade to 1.15.1?
I noticed that when installing Amanda from FreeBSD ports, the
installation pulls in gtar from ports (archivers/gtar), which is
currently version 1.15.1. However, my FreeBSD 5.4 seems to include GNU
tar 1.13.25 installed with base FreeBSD system as /usr/bin/gtar and I
was thinking, maybe there is no need to have two gtars on my system?
BTW, I currently use dump for backups, so gtar is only used for
indexes.
As near as I have been able to determine, they are interchangeable.
I've been using 1.15-1 since it came out. 1.13 plain, and any 1.14 will
eat your lunch however.
As Debian stable has 1.14-2.2, I guess there do exist good (patched)
versions...
If I was good at reading code, I'd like to see the comments that went along
with that patchset. A 1.14-2 was never available at gnu.org that I know
of. After the 1.14 fiasco, I made it a saturday evening job to check and
see if a new one was out, but it went from 1.14-1 directly to 1.15-1
ANAICT given the frequency of my checking.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 --
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker.
But when I'm talking to journalists I just say programmer or something
like that. -- Linus Torvalds
--
Cheers, Gene
There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Is GNU tar 1.13.25 still good with 2.5.0p2?
Hello! I'm planning to upgrade my Amanda server (currently 2.4.5) to 2.5.0p2. I'm wondering whether GNU tar 1.13.25 is still officially considered a good version, or is it absolutely required to upgrade to 1.15.1? I noticed that when installing Amanda from FreeBSD ports, the installation pulls in gtar from ports (archivers/gtar), which is currently version 1.15.1. However, my FreeBSD 5.4 seems to include GNU tar 1.13.25 installed with base FreeBSD system as /usr/bin/gtar and I was thinking, maybe there is no need to have two gtars on my system? BTW, I currently use dump for backups, so gtar is only used for indexes.
Re: Is GNU tar 1.13.25 still good with 2.5.0p2?
Toomas, GNU tar 1.13 should be good; The real troublemaker is tar 1.14, which will silently corrupt your archives and throw away data. Unfortunately, some distributions patch their tar with other code, so some versions of tar 1.13 are problematic, whereas some versions of tar 1.14 are perfectly fine. That said, however: On Friday 18 August 2006 11:35, Toomas Aas wrote: BTW, I currently use dump for backups, so gtar is only used for indexes. No, Amanda will even use dump to generate indices. So actually you don't need tar at all. Cheers, --Ian -- Wiki for Amanda documentation: http://wiki.zmanda.com/
Re: Is GNU tar 1.13.25 still good with 2.5.0p2?
Ian Turner wrote: On Friday 18 August 2006 11:35, Toomas Aas wrote: BTW, I currently use dump for backups, so gtar is only used for indexes. No, Amanda will even use dump to generate indices. So actually you don't need tar at all. Of course, what was I thinking.
Re: Is GNU tar 1.13.25 still good with 2.5.0p2?
On Friday 18 August 2006 11:35, Toomas Aas wrote: Hello! I'm planning to upgrade my Amanda server (currently 2.4.5) to 2.5.0p2. I'm wondering whether GNU tar 1.13.25 is still officially considered a good version, or is it absolutely required to upgrade to 1.15.1? I noticed that when installing Amanda from FreeBSD ports, the installation pulls in gtar from ports (archivers/gtar), which is currently version 1.15.1. However, my FreeBSD 5.4 seems to include GNU tar 1.13.25 installed with base FreeBSD system as /usr/bin/gtar and I was thinking, maybe there is no need to have two gtars on my system? BTW, I currently use dump for backups, so gtar is only used for indexes. As near as I have been able to determine, they are interchangeable. I've been using 1.15-1 since it came out. 1.13 plain, and any 1.14 will eat your lunch however. -- Cheers, Gene There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
Re: Is GNU tar 1.13.25 still good with 2.5.0p2?
On Friday 18 August 2006 12:01, Ian Turner wrote: Toomas, GNU tar 1.13 should be good; No Ian, plain 1.13 is broken, 1.13-19, 1.13-25, and 1.15-1 are the known good versions. The real troublemaker is tar 1.14, which will silently corrupt your archives and throw away data. Unfortunately, some distributions patch their tar with other code, so some versions of tar 1.13 are problematic, whereas some versions of tar 1.14 are perfectly fine. Never found a 1.14, any suffix (AFAIK there was only one), that would run ok here. Maybe I didn't try them all, but I don't enjoy bleeding enough to go back and recheck. 1.14, FWIW, only had maybe a 45 day lifetime on the gnu.org ftp site that I know of before it was pulled in favor of 1.15-1. That said, however: On Friday 18 August 2006 11:35, Toomas Aas wrote: BTW, I currently use dump for backups, so gtar is only used for indexes. No, Amanda will even use dump to generate indices. So actually you don't need tar at all. Cheers, --Ian -- Cheers, Gene There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
tar (GNU tar) 1.13.25 missing files in index
Hello, using tar (GNU tar) 1.13.25, I am missing files from the index that amrecover generates. From a folder with about 30 thousand files in it, amrecover lists about 10 files. This may or may not be related to the faq-o-matic http://amanda.sourceforge.net/fom-serve/cache/310.html, because my index file looks corrupted: 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_Logo_ISO.jpg 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_Logo_ISOW.jpg 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_Logo_OOEX.gif 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_Logo_OOEX2.gif 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_News_CA.jpg 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_News_FAQ.jpg 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_News_OP.jpg But please note that all hosts are using tar 1.13.25, which is later than the suspected 1.13.19 bug. The corrupted indexing is only happening on *one* of my client machines, running gnu tar 1.13.25. -- Jason Greenberg, CCNP Network Administrator Execulink, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: tar (GNU tar) 1.13.25 missing files in index
On Friday 27 September 2002 08:42, Jason Greenberg wrote: Hello, using tar (GNU tar) 1.13.25, I am missing files from the index that amrecover generates. From a folder with about 30 thousand files in it, amrecover lists about 10 files. This may or may not be related to the faq-o-matic http://amanda.sourceforge.net/fom-serve/cache/310.html, because my index file looks corrupted: 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_Logo_ISO.jpg 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_Logo_ISOW.jpg 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_Logo_OOEX.gif 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_Logo_OOEX2.gif 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_News_CA.jpg 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_News_FAQ.jpg 07544045020/./abaverh/public_html/WDBRY/wdbry_img_News_OP.jpg But please note that all hosts are using tar 1.13.25, which is later than the suspected 1.13.19 bug. The corrupted indexing is only happening on *one* of my client machines, running gnu tar 1.13.25. I think I'd do a locate on both tar, and gnutar on the machine, and make sure that ALL of them are either 1.13-25, or are links to it. There may e an old one laying around thats being found first in the $PATH. -- Cheers, Gene AMD K6-III@500mhz 320M Athlon1600XP@1400mhz 512M 99.16% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Tar 1.13.25?
Hi! I've seen on FreeBSD a listing for gtar 1.13.25. However, I can't seem to find the sub-revision number in the sources downloaded from ftp.gnu.org , and the most recent rpm from redhat is for 1.13.19-1. Are the sources on ftp.gnu.org for 1.13.25? Or should I just upgrade the lone gnu/linux machine 1.13.19? Thanks, Ricky - Richard MorseSystem Administrator MGH Biostatistics Center 50 Staniford St. Rm 560 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 617/724-9830
Re: Tar 1.13.25?
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Morse, Richard E. wrote: Hi! I've seen on FreeBSD a listing for gtar 1.13.25. However, I can't seem to find the sub-revision number in the sources downloaded from ftp.gnu.org , and the most recent rpm from redhat is for 1.13.19-1. Are the sources on ftp.gnu.org for 1.13.25? Or should I just upgrade the lone gnu/linux machine 1.13.19? I had trouble finding 1.13.19 when I needed it. I ended up getting it from ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/tar/. - Eric
Re: Tar 1.13.25?
Hi! I've seen on FreeBSD a listing for gtar 1.13.25. However, I can't seem to find the sub-revision number in the sources downloaded from ftp.gnu.org ... You need to go to alpha.gnu.org. It's beyond me what the GNU folks are doing with tar and why a decent version isn't in their standard ftp area. Ricky John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
