[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option
From: |
Pavel Raiskup |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option |
Date: |
Fri, 16 Aug 2013 08:15:10 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/4.10.5 (Linux/3.10.4-300.fc19.x86_64; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; ) |
> So perhaps tar should allow subsequent (as opposed to recursive) reads of
> the same file?
Ahh, I see now what happens there :), thanks. Yes. That would make
sense.
.. && do we really need to parse all options? Wouldn't it be better to
artificially bound the -T FILE parsing power? I mean, this is starting to
have Turing machine power :) and such lazy option evaluation probably
hides a lot of surprises... and users could potentially think everything
is supported.
Trying again, wait .. I can observe that the lazy opt_parsing is broken
even for the -C option:
$ ls
po/ configure
$ ls po/ # (empty)
$ cat FILE
-Cpo
configure
$ tar -cf test.tar -T FILE (this successes!)
$ tar -tf test.tar
configure
Pavel
- [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2013/08/04
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Pavel Raiskup, 2013/08/05
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2013/08/05
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Pavel Raiskup, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Pavel Raiskup, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Christian Wetzel, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Pavel Raiskup, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2013/08/15
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option,
Pavel Raiskup <=
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2013/08/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Pavel Raiskup, 2013/08/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2013/08/16
- Re: [Bug-tar] tar -T option, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2013/08/16
- [Bug-tar] [PATCH] tar -T option, Pavel Raiskup, 2013/08/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] [PATCH] tar -T option, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2013/08/19