[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tar for the base revision
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] tar for the base revision |
Date: |
Tue, 23 Sep 2003 10:24:12 -0700 (PDT) |
> From: Samuel Tardieu <address@hidden>
> Isn't tar a poor choice for storing a base revision? I seem to recall
> that there is a 100 characters path limit or so in the tar format, is
> it still the case?
Honestly, I'm not sure where the standards for tar are at these days,
but GNU tar fixed that limit a long time ago and has been relatively
stable in that regard since --- so that's why arch explicitly uses
`GNU tar', not just `tar'.
As nearly as I can tell, there isn't a terrific interesection between
the three sets:
* archival programs that stick to a credible standard
* archival programs that are (essentially) universally ported
or implemented
* archival programs without stupid, arbitrary limits
GNU tar is a member of the most important 2 out of those three sets,
so that's what we use.
In (standards) theory, `pax' would be a better choice, but it is not a
member of the "universally ported or [correctly] implemented" set.
-t