Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'This is a problem with the BSD tar supplied with Tiger, GNU tar and xtar have no such problem' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
This is a problem with the BSD tar supplied with Tiger, GNU tar and xtar have no such problem
Authored by: ruaric on Aug 20, '06 05:55:21AM
You link does not work. I assume it did when you provided it but it does not now.

I believe the problem here is that in Tiger's tar is based off BSD tar. However xtar and Panther's tar are based off of GNU tar 1.13.25 (I'm not sure why Apple made the switch back to BSD for this utility).

Anyway GNU tar 1.13.25 uses the GNU tar format by default. Archives in GNU format are able to hold pathnames of unlimited length. You can find more information on the variying tar formats on the GNU website: http://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_node/Formats.html#Formats

In order to confirm the above I have just tested creating folders with very long names (well over 100 characters) and archived them with xtar. This resulted in no errors and both the long filenames and resource forks were preserved correctly. Therefore, based on your experience I would suggest that Tiger users use xtar rather than the tar supplied by Apple for imporant backups.

(Note: I would advise doing your own testing of xtar to confirm what I have stated above).

[ Reply to This | # ]
To clarify, my tests included multipart tar backups.
Authored by: ruaric on Aug 20, '06 05:58:38AM

As per the title I did also test multipart tar backups with long file names and resource forks. Again, I had no problems.



[ Reply to This | # ]