Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ho95b.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ho95b!wcs
From: wcs@ho95b.UUCP (Bill Stewart)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: how universal is tar format? SYSV?
Message-ID: <377@ho95b.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 18-Apr-85 18:43:29 EST
Article-I.D.: ho95b.377
Posted: Thu Apr 18 18:43:29 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 19-Apr-85 01:30:24 EST
References: <9528@brl-tgr.ARPA>, <159@hadron.UUCP> <353@bu-cs.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 20

>You are making the classic mistake, my original comments had more
>to do with randomly created tapes falling in your lap (ie. *I*
>didn't write them.) The whole point was mucho trouble with cpio tape
>in at least one case (argh!! don't respond with ways to write portable
>cpio tapes! this one was from AT&T, it was tooo late.) and very little
>trouble with tar tapes. If you have control you can write a portable
>EBCDIC tape with dd, as long as *you* read and *you* write it.
>	-Barry Shein, Boston University

We get lots of bizarre tapes; the EBCDIC ones are usually the easiest
to read - most of them are 80-column, 1680-blocksize (or non-blocked).
The tough ones are the 5-volume set, with a piece of duct tape
numbered 1,2,3,4,or 5 as the only labeling.  Of course it was
binary, but we did have a nearly-unreadable photocopy of the first
page of the printout, with some format info...   "What's a Blocksize?"

The critical part is getting the people to mark the tape reel with
the format (NOOOO, that's a NON-labelled TAPE, with a labelled REEL, not...)
---
				Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ