eric@snark.uucp (Eric S. Raymond) (05/11/87)
I'd favor leaving in the tar specification *and* adding cpio. That way,
users of a POSIX-conforming system get the best of both. I think tar's
only real advantage is the multi-volume capability, otherwise cpio is much
superior. What would *really* win is a spec for multi-volume cpio (perhaps
P1003.2 should do this).
BTW, I contributed some stuff to one of the draft versions of Section 10
(specifically, the proposal for a multi-volume tar format with the
ability to recover from a missing volume that is also upward-compatible with
the present one), so I feel like I have something of a proprietary interest
in this stuff. Please email me with an update if you don't get enough response
to merit a posting.
---
Eric S. Raymond
UUCP: {{seismo,ihnp4,rutgers}!cbmvax,sdcrdcf!burdvax}!snark!eric
Post: 22 South Warren Avenue, Malvern, PA 19355
Phone: (215)-296-5718
Volume-Number: Volume 11, Number 25