les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (01/05/89)
Does anyone have modifications to GNU tar to work with the SysVr3 directory routines (and perhaps some macros to replace the things in port.c)? Also, is there likely to be a GNU cpio? The enhancements look great but I wish it could use cpio-style headers instead of the larger tar version for each file. Les Mikesell
kinmonthprep@deneb.ucdavis.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth) (01/06/89)
In article <7369@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: >Does anyone have modifications to GNU tar to work with the SysVr3 >directory routines (and perhaps some macros to replace the things >in port.c)? Also, is there likely to be a GNU cpio? The enhancements >look great but I wish it could use cpio-style headers instead of the larger >tar version for each file. I have a total rewrite of the first GNU tar that includes directory routines for V7 (same as Sys III ?), 4.? BSD, and MSDOS. It runs under MSDOS 3.x, SCO Xenix, 4.3 BSD, etc. A PD version of cpio has been posted, but I have not tried it. I gave up on cpio (despite the somewhat higher storage density) because it is much, much harder to recover damaged cpio archives than it is tar archives. Also, most versions of cpio do not recognize output device size limitations.
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (01/07/89)
In article <3438@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> kinmonthprep@deneb.ucdavis.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth) writes: > >I have a total rewrite of the first GNU tar that includes directory >routines for V7 (same as Sys III ?), 4.? BSD, and MSDOS. It runs under >MSDOS 3.x, SCO Xenix, 4.3 BSD, etc. > >A PD version of cpio has been posted, but I have not tried it. I gave >up on cpio (despite the somewhat higher storage density) because it is >much, much harder to recover damaged cpio archives than it is tar >archives. Also, most versions of cpio do not recognize output device >size limitations. I want to use the native sysVr3 opendir(),readdir(),mkdir() etc. Probably trivial but I thought I'd ask first. The anti-SysV bias is a little thick even by GNU standards. The "afio" program posted awhile back was able to recover a partially damaged archive. I would like to see the two programs merged with a few other things added, like per-file compression, ability to store a directory in another file, output to a list of devices, etc. Les Mikesell
allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) (01/12/89)
As quoted from <3438@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> by kinmonthprep@deneb.ucdavis.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth): +--------------- | A PD version of cpio has been posted, but I have not tried it. I gave | up on cpio (despite the somewhat higher storage density) because it is | much, much harder to recover damaged cpio archives than it is tar | archives. Also, most versions of cpio do not recognize output device | size limitations. +--------------- Afio supports device size limitations; it is also able to recover damaged cpio archives (I have even started reading in the middle of a multipart cpio archive and had it work). Moreover, I found it to be rather simple to add a label-skipping flag to afio so I could read 3B1 disks on other machines. (Before anyone deluges me with requests, they were posted to unix-pc.sources a year ago; check the archives.) I personally prefer cpio/afio to tar, and afio is one of the programs I always import into a system I'm going to use (the others are jove and a homebrew environment manager I may post someday, as well as a standard .cshrc and .login, and often 16-bit compress as well). ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery, comp.sources.misc moderator and one admin of ncoast PA UN*X uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu ncoast is registering as "ncoast.org" -- watch for the official announcement! Send comp.sources.misc submissions to comp-sources-misc@<backbone>.