Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:26:45 +0100
From:      Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com>
To:        Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>,  "Sherman, Michael (GE Energy)" <michael.sherman@og.ge.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: tar or gtar
Message-ID:  <42D3C515.7070305@dial.pipex.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050712120326.GA29851@beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv>
References:  <9CC5C6311E4BBB45BF135CAF2B9B6DB4014AC60E@SCHMLVEM04.e2k.ad.ge.com> <20050712120326.GA29851@beatrix.daedalusnetworks.priv>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:

>Hmmm, I'm not sitting on FreeBSD, but looking at the manpage I can only
>see -y (bzip2 compression) and -z (gzip compression); I couldn't find an
>option called -Z.
>
-Z is compress -- possibly gtar only.  It's much worse than the 
alternatives and is only useful for compatibility.  I still see .Z files 
occasionally.  A bit surprised to see it completely missing from bsd tar.

$ tar -cZf foo.tar.Z foo
tar: .Z compression not supported

So it's still recognised at some level.

In fact

$ tar -cf foo.tar foo
$ compress foo.tar
$ tar -tZf foo.tar.Z
foo
foo/files
foo/files/patch-Makefile.in
foo/distinfo
foo/pkg-descr
foo/pkg-plist
foo/Makefile

So it will still unpack.  Presumably won't create since gzip is now 
ubiquitous and compress is awful by comparison.


--Alex




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42D3C515.7070305>