# 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_at_, 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.htmlReceived on Tue Aug 03 2004 - 05:29:04 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:04 UTC