Volker Armin Hemmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Samstag, 22. September 2007, Florian Philipp wrote:
>> star supports p7zip which can be much better and especially more >> flexible than bzip2, gzip and zip. Its other features (better >> funcionality for acl, sparse files, recovery and backups among other >> things) didn't sound bad, either. > > I don't know - bzip2 is very good at 'recovery' because only the affected > block is lost. True - in theory. It doesn't help you much, if you lose a block in a .tar.bz2 file, as the block sizes of bzip2 and tar won't overlap. Thus, something like ".bz2.tar" would be better, meaning a tar which contains pre compressed files. Granted, compression ratio would be worse. If you want safety, I'd either suggest afio or maybe something like par. > and if p7zip supports pipes, you don't need its support in tar. Just pipe > from/to it. It does and that's the way it's supposed to be used on unix, according to its manpage. > as you can see, you need to play around with pipes anyway when you use > star. So switching just because of one compression algo and become > incompatible with the way emerge unpacks packages sounds pretty stupid > IMHO. ACK Alexander Skwar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
