On Sat, Mar 17, 2007 at 06:54:28PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> 
> What he said.  Why shouldn't we cause our pax to use this code?  I believe
> even Christos isn't opposed to the idea, in principle (I'm sure he'll
> correct me if I remember our discussion of this wrong).

I am aware of the following limitations of bsdtar (relative to tar),
quoting the man page:
     The r and u modes require that the archive be uncompressed and
     located in a regular file on disk.  Other archives can be modified
     using c mode with the @archive-file extension.

     There is not yet any support for multi-volume archives or for
     archiving sparse files.

In addition it currently doesn't support --use-compress-program, but I
intent to fix that. pax support itself shouldn't require any additional
features.

Joerg