Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site hadron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!trwatf!rlgvax!prcrs!hadron!jsdy
From: jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao)
Newsgroups: net.unix,net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Tape drives and protection of tapes (using tar)
Message-ID: <165@hadron.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Apr-85 14:36:34 EST
Article-I.D.: hadron.165
Posted: Thu Apr 11 14:36:34 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Apr-85 04:26:58 EST
References: <1634@psuvax1.UUCP> <9638@brl-tgr.ARPA> <725@whuxlm.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Hadron, Inc., Fairfax, VA
Lines: 16
Xref: watmath net.unix:4267 net.unix-wizards:12832

> If UNIX(tm) were really a user friendly system, it would support
> `labeled' tapes and then you would have this problem. The system
> would read the tape label before writing on it to ensure it really
> was the one that was requested.

I would like to disagree strongly (but in a user-friendly manner).
The operating system has no business whatsoever interpreting what
is on a raw device like a tape, unless it is mounted as (say) a
file system.  If UNIX had decided on some label format, even ANSI
label format, then it would not be possible (as possible?) to use
it as such a powerful tool for decrypting the rest of the world's
tapes.  Have you ever  t r i e d  interpreting, say, a TOPS-20
tape under VMS?  I have.  No fun.  And that's from the same
manufacturer!

	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{ARPA,UUCP}