From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: RE: [9fans] dumb question
From: rog@vitanuova.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20020626174727.1E84C19A65@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 18:53:01 +0100
Topicbox-Message-UUID: ba08781a-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> possibly, keep in mind its a complete waste of file server resources to
> repeatedly tar/untar a directory tree, all i want is the ability to copy a
> directory tree without having to use a program that wasnt really designed
> for that anyways.

actually it's quite possible that the tar pipeline is *more* efficient
than a traditionally implemented cp -r, as it's doing reading and
writing in parallel.

i wouldn't be surprised to see the tar pipeline win out over cp -r
when copying between different disks.

the most valid objection is that tar doesn't cope with the new, longer
filenames in plan 9 (if that's true).  that could be annoying on
occasion.

  rog.