[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Bug-tar] RE: GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision
From: |
Jan Psota |
Subject: |
[Bug-tar] RE: GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision |
Date: |
Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:47:11 +0200 |
> OS ?????
Sorry.
Gentoo 2.0.
> Note: If you plan to compare file extraction performance, you need to use
> "star -no-fsync ..." to make star behave as unreliable as GNU tar does.
Of course, I'll test it again. With BSD-tar also (thanks to Tim Kientzle :-).
Only once I found star more reliable than tar:
when sending archive over network with netcat and terminating
connection on receivers side (I forgot to set nc to automatic
disconnect with -q), all symbolic links were created as zero-length files.
It was some versions ago, and now GNU tar doesn't behave like this.
But I can see, that star looks more like, for instance, SCO UNIX tar program
(that's ok :-).
Thank You for advice.
--
Jan Psota
- ODP: [Bug-tar] LZO and LZMA compression, (continued)
- Re: [Bug-tar] LZO and LZMA compression, Joerg Schilling, 2007/10/17
- [Bug-tar] GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision, Jan Psota, 2007/10/17
- Re: [Bug-tar] GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision, Tim Kientzle, 2007/10/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision, Joerg Schilling, 2007/10/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision, Jan-Benedict Glaw, 2007/10/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision, Joerg Schilling, 2007/10/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision, Jan-Benedict Glaw, 2007/10/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision, Joerg Schilling, 2007/10/18
- [Bug-tar] Re: GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision, Joerg Schilling, 2007/10/18
- [Bug-tar] RE: GNU TAR or STAR -- speed comparision,
Jan Psota <=