[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Lzip-bug] Tarlz 0.4: Use of 'ustar' format instead of 'posix'; ques

From: Timothy Beryl Grahek
Subject: Re: [Lzip-bug] Tarlz 0.4: Use of 'ustar' format instead of 'posix'; question about future of Tarlz utility
Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 11:12:54 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0

Hi Antonio,

It is both possible and desirable. The 'posix' format is an extension on top of the 'ustar' format, so I plan to make tarlz use a "limited posix format"; 'ustar' where posible and 'posix' only on the files requiring it for any reason (long name, large size). This removes all limitations while remaining as compatible and simple as possible.

That sounds excellent and would greatly increase Tarlz's usability.

Would you be interested in expanding the features of Tarlz to make it a
more feature rich utility?

Sure. Suggestions are welcome. :-)

Thanks! Four features that would make Tarlz even more useful are these:

 * Expanding the operations of Tarlz to include --delete and -A
   (concatenate) would be helpful to me, since those are the two
   additional operations I tend to use in tar programs.
 * For the '-c' and '-x' operations, if it could report %
   (de)compression progress per file in an archive based on the '-vv'
   option, that would be helpful.
 * If it could report an average % compression and other statistics
   summary based on, say, a '-s' option for the '-t', '-c', and '-x'
   operations, that would be helpful. This could be similar to what
   Lzip reports after successful compression and decompression of
   files, except it would describe an archive rather than an individual
 * If the '-t' operation could display the compression saved % and
   ratio % per file in an archive by specifying a '-v' or '-vv' option,
   that would be helpful. It may make sense if the '-c' and '-x'
   operations could display this, too, when specifying the '-vv' option
   after successfully (de)compressing files in an archive.

But by far the most valuable change to Tarlz, in my humble opinion, is implementing that "limited posix format" that you mentioned. :-)

Here you can find the specification of the 'ustar' and 'posix' (pax) formats:

I will certainly take a look at that link, thank you.

Glad to know that tarlz is already useful to someone. :-)
Yes, Tarlz has turned out to be extremely useful. :-) In practice, not having a multi-member format for archives larger than, say, 6 GB is quite inconvenient when you want to extract individual folders or files from an archive and you don't have a fast processor or SSD, neither of which do I have. I have an Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 with an HDD, so I think my machine may be a good test subject, haha.

Best regards,

Timothy Beryl Grahek

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]