HEADS UP: tar -l is now (intentionally) broken.
neuhauser at chello.cz
Tue Aug 3 00:29:04 PDT 2004
# kientzle at freebsd.org / 2004-08-02 22:55:45 -0700:
> Since POSIX and GNU violently disagree about the
> meaning of "tar -l", and there seem to be strong
> adherents to both interpretations, I'm preparing to
> commit a patch that breaks "tar -l" for everyone:
All I can see is three posts in current@, that's
not much of a discussion (or voting).
I for one, would prefer POSIX compliance. :)
> $ tar -cl foo
> Error: -l has different behaviors in different tars.
> For the GNU behavior, use --one-file-system instead.
> For the POSIX behavior, use --check-links instead.
How about turning this into a warning?
> I don't believe the change to -l will break more than a couple
> of ports. Prior to this change, ports that specified
> -l would get the POSIX behavior even though they
> may have thought they were requesting the GNU
> behavior. This change will force you to unambiguously
> specify the particular behavior you desire.
> In short, everyone wins on -o, everyone loses
> on -l. That seems fair. ;-)
I believe "loses" is the keyword here. I don't see how this
would benefit anyone in the long term, sticking with either
side would be better (but please choose POSIX :).
If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore
your message. see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html
More information about the freebsd-ports