[ On , January 22, 1999 at 17:08:58 (-0500), Perry E. Metzger wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: CVS commit: src
> 
> Wrong answer, Mr. Woods. pax is going to be a full replacement for
> tar(1) at some point and we aren't going to do that without supporting 
> the existing option syntax so people's scripts don't break.

Pax *IS* a full replacement for tar(1).  It's just not a full
replacement for GNU Tar, and I'm arguing that it *NEVER* should be.

Have I suddently started using a GNU/Linux system or something?!?!?!

Anyone using GNU Tar options on a *BSD machine with the 'tar' command
should be made aware of their dependency sooner, rather than later so
that their usage doesn't break when pax == tar.  This could relatively
easily be done by hacking GNU Tar to warn when its unique options are
used and it was invoked as "tar" instead of "gtar".

Clearly anyone who wants to use gtar can install it from pkg(src) or
from the "horse's mouth" (or from a RedHat RPM if they have the rpm tool
installed).

(I still don't know, after all these years, why GNU Tar wasn't quickly
eradicated from NetBSD way back when 4.4BSD-Lite was first imported.)

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <gwoods@acm.org>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>