Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix
From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: Standards Update, IEEE 1003.1: System services interface
Message-ID: <767@longway.TIC.COM>
Date: 2 Jul 90 00:18:32 GMT
References: <385@usenix.ORG> <754@longway.TIC.COM>
Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM
Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 22
Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)

From:  peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva)

In article <754@longway.TIC.COM> From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
> The ANSI magtape format is simply inappropriate.  UNIX archives were
> designed to be single files, making it simple to transport them by
> means other than magnetic tape.  In this modern networked world, for
> the most part magnetic tape is an anachronism.  Any archive format
> standard for UNIX should not depend on the archive supporting
> multiple files, tape marks, or any other non-UNIX concept.

I disagree. There are just too many organisations using ANSI format magtapes.
Tar and CPIO should both be retained, but the ability to read and write
standard ANSI magtapes... if the hardware is available... should be part
of a portable operating system standard. So for that matter should such things
as different receive and transmit baud rates (ever hear of V.23 modems?),
but that's another point.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
+1 713 274 5180.
<peter@ficc.ferranti.com>

Volume-Number: Volume 20, Number 82