Re: resolution of the tar -I issue
Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 06:08:23PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote: depricating -I in Debian Package sounds very good. besides that -j (junkzip?) is NON-DESCRIPTIVE at all. -Z or -2 would be better... but thats an Upstream Issue I guess. -Z is for piping through compress, and is (I believe) legacy compatible to a number of proprietary tars. -[0-7][lmh] specify drive and density I'm not sure exactly what that's for, but it does rule out -2. It kinda sucks when you completely run out of single character options. %-)
Re: resolution of the tar -I issue
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 10:18:21PM -0800, Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo wrote: -[0-7][lmh] specify drive and density I'm not sure exactly what that's for, but it does rule out -2. It kinda sucks when you completely run out of single character options. %-) That's for specifying a tape drive and tape density setting. -- - mdz
resolution of the tar -I issue
I'm satisfied with this solution, and will work with Paul to deliver an implementation for Debian as soon as possible. Bdale --- Forwarded Message Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 12:49:43 -0800 (PST) From: Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: can we get rid of -I entirely, please? From: Bdale Garbee [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 09:18:51 -0700 After lots of discussion on the Debian developer mailing lists, the solution that I think makes the most sense is: the -I option be removed from the documentation and usage messages use of -I becomes an error that communicates that -j is the right option for bzip2, and -T is the equivalent of -I in Solaris tar I think this meets everyone's needs. OK, you talked me into this for the next tar version. This will give people time to switch. We can then reintroduce -I as an alias for -T in a later version of GNU tar. --- End of Forwarded Message
Re: resolution of the tar -I issue
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Bdale Garbee wrote: I'm satisfied with this solution, and will work with Paul to deliver an implementation for Debian as soon as possible. [snip] I'm happy with this solution. BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK Version: 3.12 GCS d- s: a-- c+++ UL P+ L !E W+ M o+ K- W--- !O M- !V PS-- PE++ Y+ PGP++ t* 5++ X+ tv b+ D++ G e h*! !r z? -END GEEK CODE BLOCK- BEGIN PGP INFO Adam Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED]Finger Print | KeyID 67 01 42 93 CA 37 FB 1E63 C9 80 1D 08 CF 84 0A | DE656B05 PGP AD46 C888 F587 F8A3 A6DA 3261 8A2C 7DC2 8BD4 A489 | 8BD4A489 GPG -END PGP INFO-
Re: resolution of the tar -I issue
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 03:09:34PM -0700, Bdale Garbee wrote: I'm satisfied with this solution, and will work with Paul to deliver an implementation for Debian as soon as possible. sounds very good. -- Mike Stone
Re: resolution of the tar -I issue
On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 06:08:23PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote: depricating -I in Debian Package sounds very good. besides that -j (junkzip?) is NON-DESCRIPTIVE at all. -Z or -2 would be better... but thats an Upstream Issue I guess. Greetings Bernd -- (OO) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ( .. ) [EMAIL PROTECTED],linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/ o--o *plush* 2048/93600EFD [EMAIL PROTECTED] +497257930613 BE5-RIPE (OO) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!
