From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EZCtf-0001ie-W8 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 19:43:16 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jA7JfhXJ028813; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 19:41:43 GMT Received: from egr.msu.edu (jeeves.egr.msu.edu [35.9.37.127]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jA7Jc166013986 for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 19:38:02 GMT Received: from [35.9.132.144] (nagoya.dhcp.egr.msu.edu [35.9.132.144]) by egr.msu.edu (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jA7Jc3nX027397 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 14:38:03 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <436FAD19.5030007@egr.msu.edu> Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:38:01 -0500 From: Alec Joseph Warner User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Creation and handling of virtual/tar References: <2A48F193-61DF-424B-B351-A3D0EEB47736@gentoo.org> <436F9B4C.3040402@gentoo.org> <200511071945.39657@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> In-Reply-To: <200511071945.39657@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id jA7JfhYu028813 X-Archives-Salt: ebd91af6-89ad-4b89-973a-10d1e0225a67 X-Archives-Hash: 14cc0ce43dbb657dff93c37d84ef84ff Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten=F2 wrote: > On Monday 07 November 2005 19:22, Donnie Berkholz wrote: >=20 >>Sure. What's the point? What benefit does one tar have over the other? >>How is bsdtar more capable in any situation than gnutar? >=20 > the first point is not to change the default behavior of an userland, s= o=20 > FreeBSD should have FreeBSD tar. >=20 > About the difference between the two, I still prefer bsdtar because is = a=20 > little more cleaner (imho), it does not use gzip/bzip2 in pipe to=20 > extract .tar.gz and .tar.bz2 archives, and it extracts zip files and is= o=20 > files. >=20 > And it's a choice people can do, default users won't see any difference= =20 > anyway. >=20 So why is a virtual needed? Don't the two packages co-exist? --=20 gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list