woods@most.weird.com (Greg A. Woods) writes:
> > 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?!?!?!

No, you've been using a system that has operated with gnu tar for
literally years, and it would be a Bad Thing to break user
scripts. Users (understandably) get upset by that. If you don't like
it, feel free not to use the options. No one forces you.

I don't think further discussion is merited.

Perry