[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness
From: |
Eric Sunshine |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness |
Date: |
Sun, 18 Apr 2004 17:46:05 -0400 |
On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 23:18:05 +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> address@hidden selects the new pax format defined by POSIX
> +1003.1-2001. It supports filenames with up to 65535 characters.
> +However this format is very young and should probably be avoided in
> +all packages that do not target only modern systems.
Perhaps, a bit more idiomatic:
"However, this format is very young and should probably be restricted to
packages which target only very modern platforms."
-- ES
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, (continued)
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/17
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/17
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Roger Leigh, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/18
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness,
Eric Sunshine <=
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Paul Eggert, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Gunnar Ritter, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/19
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/19
- Message not available
- Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/04/19
Re: [Bug-tar] Re: AMTAR brokenness, Sergey Poznyakoff, 2004/04/16