cd burning software for Solaris 10 SPARC

js-at-cs.tu-berlin.de (Joerg Schilling) writes:

> I still do not understand. Whom, if not me would you ask whether a
> tar archive is sufficiently standard compliant?
>
> If you do not believe me for this, you would believe nobody.

You misunderstand what I mean. It's *not* that I do not believe
you. Off course I do. I can read too and came across lots of
information on your history as pioneer on the 'TAR' field. I don't
question that quality! But believing that something *is* the way it
*is* is something different than *understanding*. You wrote about
terms a good TAR program should meet. OK, but that did not shine more
light on the simple fact that your a26 was handled correctly and a27
was not. I presumed they were *both* POSIX compliant (because they
were both made by you). And yet, there was that difference I could not
explain and you did not care to explain. I still do not know what is
different in a26 and a27. I have never read an explanation yet.

So, resuming, I did not question your authority on the matter.
You always replied to my messages. They did not bring me
understanding, that's all. Still, I thank you for your time.

--
Dick Hoogendijk -- PGP/GnuPG key: F86289CE
++ http://nagual.nl/ + Solaris 11 05/07 ++

In article , Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
>js-at-cs.tu-berlin.de (Joerg Schilling) writes:
>
>> I still do not understand. Whom, if not me would you ask whether a
>> tar archive is sufficiently standard compliant?
>>
>> If you do not believe me for this, you would believe nobody.
>
>You misunderstand what I mean. It's *not* that I do not believe
>you. Off course I do. I can read too and came across lots of
>information on your history as pioneer on the 'TAR' field. I don't
>question that quality! But believing that something *is* the way it
>*is* is something different than *understanding*. You wrote about
>terms a good TAR program should meet. OK, but that did not shine more
>light on the simple fact that your a26 was handled correctly and a27
>was not. I presumed they were *both* POSIX compliant (because they
>were both made by you). And yet, there was that difference I could not
>explain and you did not care to explain. I still do not know what is
>different in a26 and a27. I have never read an explanation yet.

Things are not as simple... not all programs with bugs show us is these
bugs with every invocation. Depending of the cause of the bug, sometimes
very small changes are sufficient to explore or hide the bug.





--
EMail:joerg-at-schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js-at-cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling-at-fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> In article , Dick Hoogendijk
> wrote:

> I still do not understand. Whom, if not me would you ask whether a
> tar archive is sufficiently standard compliant?

That's not what he asked. The question basically was: What
did you do differently, when you created a27 in comparison
to a26 (and prior versions)?

Alexander Skwar