> "HPA" == H Peter Anvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
HPA> Could someone comment on whether or not GNU cpio would work as pax?
HPA> That would be a very clean solution if it works.
GNU paxutils might be a better choice, if it is ever released. Actually,
GNU tar and paxutils are eventually go
Alan Shutko wrote:
>
> Kevin Vajk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > 8^) Do you have a link to any info on it somewhere?
> >
> > Not really, other than the man pages on UNIX systems. It is
> > (or at least will be) part of POSIX, which is why I think we
> > should have it.
>
> Ick! It's cpi
Alan Shutko wrote:
>
> Kevin Vajk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > There appears to be BSD-licensed code in FreeBSD we
> > could use, and some people claim (although I disagree)
> > that it's the new archiving standard.
>
> How can it be the new archiving standard if I've never heard of it.
>
JF Martinez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> IMHO what we should do is crush other Unixes and become the standard
> instead of caring about Posix.
>
> In many ways trying to blindly follow the Unix ways is hindering
> Linux.
This isn't one of those times. This is a matter of adding a single
comm
Kevin Vajk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 8^) Do you have a link to any info on it somewhere?
>
> Not really, other than the man pages on UNIX systems. It is
> (or at least will be) part of POSIX, which is why I think we
> should have it.
Ick! It's cpio on steriods, with the same junky inte
>
> On 13 Dec 1999, Alan Shutko wrote:
>
> > How can it be the new archiving standard if I've never heard of it.
>
> My sentiments exactly. :)
>
> > 8^) Do you have a link to any info on it somewhere?
>
> Not really, other than the man pages on UNIX systems. It is
> (or at least will be) p
On 13 Dec 1999, Alan Shutko wrote:
> How can it be the new archiving standard if I've never heard of it.
My sentiments exactly. :)
> 8^) Do you have a link to any info on it somewhere?
Not really, other than the man pages on UNIX systems. It is
(or at least will be) part of POSIX, which is
Kevin Vajk, writes:
> Does anybody know if there's a compelling reason for not
> including the pax command in the redhat distribution?
> There appears to be BSD-licensed code in FreeBSD we
> could use, and some people claim (although I disagree)
> that it's the new archiving standard.
New in whic
Kevin Vajk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There appears to be BSD-licensed code in FreeBSD we
> could use, and some people claim (although I disagree)
> that it's the new archiving standard.
How can it be the new archiving standard if I've never heard of it.
8^) Do you have a link to any info on
Does anybody know if there's a compelling reason for not
including the pax command in the redhat distribution?
There appears to be BSD-licensed code in FreeBSD we
could use, and some people claim (although I disagree)
that it's the new archiving standard.
- Kevin Vajk
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
10 matches
Mail list logo