Fix documentation: Why not tar?
| Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duplicity |
Triaged
|
Low
|
Unassigned | ||
Bug Description
The page "Why not tar?" on the duplicity website discusses problems with tar:
http://
A recent HN discussion addressed most of these points, maybe this could lead to improvements in duplicity?
I quote:
"The first two issues -- a lack of index and the fact that you can't seek within a deflated tarball -- are true but are easily handled by smarter compression. Tarsnap, for example, splits off archive headers and stores them separately in order to speed up archive scanning.
The third issue -- lack of support for modern filesystem features -- is just plain wrong. Sure, the tar in 7th edition UNIX didn't support these, but modern tars support modern filesystem features.
The fourth issue -- general cruft -- is correct but irrelevant on modern tars since the problems caused by the cruft are eliminated via pax extension headers."
-- http://
| Daniel Hahler (blueyed) wrote | #1 |
| summary: |
- duplicity: Why not tar? + Fix documentation: Why not tar? |
| Changed in duplicity: | |
| status: | New → Triaged |
| importance: | Undecided → Low |
Thank you for this report.
I think the documentation/
As for using tar in duplicity itself, I have no opinion myself.