Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!std-unix
From: std-unix@ut-sally.UUCP (Moderator, John Quarterman)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: tar or cpio?  Tar, of course.
Message-ID: <8045@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 12-May-87 21:04:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.8045
Posted: Tue May 12 21:04:28 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 16-May-87 12:14:10 EDT
References: <8006@ut-sally.UUCP> <8001@ut-sally.UUCP> <8011@ut-sally.UUCP> <8014@ut-sally.UUCP>
Reply-To: decvax!cwruecmp!nitrex!rbl (Rob Lake)
Organization: The Standard Oil Co., Cleveland
Lines: 20
Approved: jsq@sally.utexas.edu (Moderator, John Quarterman)

From: decvax!cwruecmp!nitrex!rbl (Rob Lake)

In article <8014@ut-sally.UUCP> gnu@hoptoad.UUCP (John Gilmore) writes:
>From: gnu@hoptoad.UUCP (John Gilmore)
>
>I don't know anybody who's ever had trouble reading a tar tape
>(assuming their hardware could read the medium).  

I've had trouble reading tar tapes, given hardware that could read
the medium.  The problem was with block sizes that were too large
for the tape drive/controller/device driver to handle.  Never could
decide which it was, but --- having once designed a tape controller ---
pretty well assumed it was not the drive itself.

[ The 3B20 tape controller has this problem.  -mod ]

Rob Lake
decvax!cwruecmp!nitrex!rbl

Volume-Number: Volume 11, Number 27