Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 03:26:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 03:26:34 -0400 Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:58105 "EHLO math.psu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 03:26:25 -0400 Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001 03:26:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Alexander Viro To: Jamie Lokier cc: Daniel Phillips , Jeff Garzik , Eugene Crosser , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Acpi] Re: ACPI fundamental locking problems In-Reply-To: <20010707233108.B10109@pcep-jamie.cern.ch> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Daniel Phillips wrote: > > > Reading a tarball is the distillation of what you describe into > > > efficient form :) > > > > /me downloads tar file definition > > > > Um, gnu tar or posix tar? or some new, improved tar? > > I suggest cpio, which is more compact and in some ways more standard. > (tar has a silly pad-to-multiple-of-512-byte per file rule, which is > inappropriate for this). GNU cpio creates cpio format just fine. GNU cpio is a race-ridden unmaintained pile of junk. Look at the size of, say it, Debian patch to upstream source. Then try to read the patched code. Quite a few of us simply don't have that FPOS on their boxen. Using cpio archive layout is OK, but _please_, don't make it dependent on GNU cpio. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/