Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!hao!seismo!brl-tgr!gwyn From: gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn) Newsgroups: net.unix Subject: Re: tar .vs. cpio Message-ID: <3883@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Thu, 9-Aug-84 19:25:07 EDT Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.3883 Posted: Thu Aug 9 19:25:07 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 12-Aug-84 01:30:43 EDT References: <198@ucbopal.CC.Berkeley.ARPA> Organization: Ballistics Research Lab Lines: 20 I changed from tar to cpio for several reasons: - tar would overflow its link table (running on a PDP-11) frequently and produce random behavior - cpio by default will not overwrite files during extraction if the archive copy is older than the current one - cpio will match files using general patterns whereas tar has no such feature - cpio can create a copy of a hierarchy using links rather than copies of the files I don't understand two of your comments, Bill. "cpio -c" makes the headers ASCII instead of binary; I don't know what "character at a time I/O" is supposed to mean but this isn't it. Also, tar is supplied with UNIX System V as it comes from AT&T. I move archives and especially partially-modified archives around a lot and find cpio to be just what I need for this task. I think the choice between the two depends on: - whether one is exporting to a non-cpio site - whether the above differences are important - personal preference