From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: neozeed@gmail.com (Jason Stevens) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 00:18:12 -0500 Subject: [TUHS] dump(8) compatibility In-Reply-To: References: <20100122003610.GB3623@dereel.lemis.com> <201001282027.o0SKRBIs001465@anduin.eldar.org> <20100215011914.GZ62998@dereel.lemis.com> <20100214.183008.635519104763620496.imp@bsdimp.com> <20100215022742.GA29101@bitmover.com> Message-ID: <46b366131002142118p4157cd7m6bc5e171692aae3@mail.gmail.com> reminds me of the tar changes with the advent of gnutar... boy have I had a lot of fun transporting files to find out when extracting it creates the directories as files..... On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:05 AM, Warner Losh wrote: > Tar and cpio at least have a standard, well understood format. Dump was > always only defined by the source. > > Warner > > > > On Feb 14, 2010, at 7:27 PM, Larry McVoy wrote: > > It used to be the case that dump was completely interchangeable >>> between the different BSDs, but software drift has rendered that not >>> the case anymore. >>> >> >> Which is why we (BitKeeper guys) don't even trust cpio/tar/etc. Wrote our >> own, works everywhere including windows. >> -- >> --- >> Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com >> http://www.bitkeeper.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ TUHS mailing list TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs