| 1 |
On Monday 07 November 2005 19:22, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 2 |
> Sure. What's the point? What benefit does one tar have over the other? |
| 3 |
> How is bsdtar more capable in any situation than gnutar? |
| 4 |
the first point is not to change the default behavior of an userland, so |
| 5 |
FreeBSD should have FreeBSD tar. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
About the difference between the two, I still prefer bsdtar because is a |
| 8 |
little more cleaner (imho), it does not use gzip/bzip2 in pipe to |
| 9 |
extract .tar.gz and .tar.bz2 archives, and it extracts zip files and iso |
| 10 |
files. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
And it's a choice people can do, default users won't see any difference |
| 13 |
anyway. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
-- |
| 16 |
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ |
| 17 |
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE |
Archives