Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site hoptoad.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!lll-crg!hoptoad!gnu
From: gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: tar format
Message-ID: <420@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: Fri, 10-Jan-86 02:04:22 EST
Article-I.D.: hoptoad.420
Posted: Fri Jan 10 02:04:22 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 12-Jan-86 00:15:14 EST
References: <358@ukecc.UUCP> <165@hadron.UUCP> <714@im4u.UUCP>
Organization: Nebula Consultants in San Francisco
Lines: 19
Keywords: P1003, tar

In article <714@im4u.UUCP>, jsq@im4u.UUCP (John Quarterman) writes:
> The current IEEE P1003 draft standard (Draft 6) includes a data interchange
> format which is modeled after tar.  It has some extensions to the V7 one,
> including a format for directory entries on the tape which is the same
> as the one 4BSD uses:  like plain files, but with a slash on the end of
> the filename.

Hmm...my copy of Draft 6 defines a new "file type" 5 for directories,
which is incompatible with both Berkeley and V7 Unixes.  It mentions
that some systems put out tapes with these trailing-slash files, but
doesn't say whether a standard system is required to do anything
about that.  (From P1003.D6.doc:)

> Implementors should be aware that the previous file format did not include
> a mechanism to archive directory type files.  For this reason, the
> convention of using a file name which ended with a slash (/) was adopted
> to specify the archiving of a directory.

Maybe jsq is referring to a draft later than D6?