home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!uunet!not-for-mail
- From: djm@eng.umd.edu (David J. MacKenzie)
- Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
- Subject: Re: Your chance to contribute to new POSIX archive format
- Date: 25 Jul 1992 18:22:04 -0700
- Organization: Project GLUE, University of Maryland
- Lines: 25
- Sender: sef@ftp.UU.NET
- Approved: sef@ftp.uucp (Moderator, Sean Eric Fagan)
- Message-ID: <14sunsINNs8@ftp.UU.NET>
- References: <14q4alINNate@ftp.UU.NET> <14seufINNqqk@ftp.UU.NET>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.uu.net
- X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net
-
- Submitted-by: djm@eng.umd.edu (David J. MacKenzie)
-
- And also, something that nor tar nor cpio have: large file names.
-
- The current limit of around 100-128 characters for the filename
- is catastrophic. Simply too short!
-
- POSIX.1 cpio format has no limit on the length of pathnames, although
- some existing implementations may place artificial limits on the
- length. POSIX.1 tar format has a limit of 100 to 256 bytes, depending
- on where slashes are located in the path.
-
- Also I guess users would appreciate: the ability to archive
- in absolute format and restore in relative. Not all users do
- relative archives. And one knows how dangerous an absolute
- archive can be. Even when I get a tape from the oustide I prefer
- being able to restore it in relative mode, without having to
- check before it all files on the archive are or not absolute.
-
- As GNU tar has demonstrated, the handling of leading slashes in
- pathnames is independent of the archive format. It's a trivial bit or
- two of code in the archiving program that can be used with any format.
-
-
- Volume-Number: Volume 28, Number 62
-