On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 11:50:56PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 06:36:59PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
IMHO those GNU utilities need to be rewritten.
And before they are rewritten, we need to add the Hurd support to them so
the people rewriting it in 2005 will
On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 05:05:16PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
If you know a way of adding support for translators with the old tar
format, that's true. I looked at it and I might have overlooked
something, but I didn't see an easy way to add it.
We already discussed this here before. The
--- Thomas Bushnell, BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neal H Walfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh, cp -R is different. I'm of two minds about what the Right Thing
is for the cp -R case.
The way to copy it, of course, is to fetch the translator entry and
set it on the copy.
I
The question I have is general and I think it's related to this
thread.
In my opinion, the passive translators used for auto-mounting
filesystems are very different from the ones used for e.g. device
files. Sure, technically they are the same, but the policy when to
use the translator and when
Kenneth Stailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do cpio, tar and pax do this? Archivers are for making backups.
No, but they certainly should. Making tar (and friends) preserve all
Hurdish attributes is much more important (in my opinion) than
fretting about cp.
On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 08:51:53AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Kenneth Stailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Do cpio, tar and pax do this? Archivers are for making backups.
No, but they certainly should. Making tar (and friends) preserve all
Hurdish attributes is much more important
Moritz Schulte [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If i would like to clone a GNU system via archiving the filesystem
tree and extracting it later somewhere else, I would expect to also
have /home archived although it's a different partition than the root
filesystem, it's a passive translator sitting
On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 06:36:59PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
IMHO those GNU utilities need to be rewritten.
And before they are rewritten, we need to add the Hurd support to them so
the people rewriting it in 2005 will know what we need.
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian
Oh, cp -R is different. I'm of two minds about what the Right Thing
is for the cp -R case.
The way to copy it, of course, is to fetch the translator entry and
set it on the copy.
I am not clear what you mean here.
Neal H Walfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh, cp -R is different. I'm of two minds about what the Right Thing
is for the cp -R case.
The way to copy it, of course, is to fetch the translator entry and
set it on the copy.
I am not clear what you mean here.
Open the node with
Oh, cp -R is different. I'm of two minds about what the Right Thing
is for the cp -R case.
The way to copy it, of course, is to fetch the translator entry and
set it on the copy.
I am not clear what you mean here.
Open the node with O_NOTRANS.
Fetch the translator spec
Neal H Walfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sure, that is obvious. I suggested in my original email that this
functionality should be added to cp:
cp does not (yet) copy the Hurd attributes (e.g. the passive
translator settings).
You said that this should not be made a
12 matches
Mail list logo
