Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: Standards Update, IEEE 1003.1: System services interface
Message-ID: <772@longway.TIC.COM>
Date: 3 Jul 90 02:57:47 GMT
References: <385@usenix.ORG> <754@longway.TIC.COM> <767@longway.TIC.COM>
Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM
Reply-To: std-unix@uunet.uu.net
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 26
Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)

From:  Doug Gwyn <gwyn@smoke.brl.mil>

In article <767@longway.TIC.COM> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
-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.

We're apparently not talking about the same thing.  I was talking about
the POSIX standard for archiving collections of files.  There is no
particular reason why that should require use of magnetic tape.  I'm not
proposing that ANSI (or ISO) magtape standards not be followed where
appropriate; you could for example put a tar or cpio archive within a
file on an ANSI-labeled magtape.  However, you can also put a tar or cpio
archive within a file on a disk, and you can ship it across a network as
a single entity, something that is not possible for ANSI magtapes in
general.

Volume-Number: Volume 20, Number 87