On Fri, 2004-07-02 at 16:06, Mariano Draghi wrote:
> Sorry! Mi fault. I meant:
>
> $] tar -zcvf foo.tar.bz foo
You're still using the "z" option which means use gzip, not bzip2. There
is no bzip shipped with FC, as far as I know bzip2 replaced bzip long
ago.
> No, I assume that with the (corrected) above command I create a *bzip*
> (no bzip2) archive.
There is no bzip in FC. There is gzip and bzip2.
> > If you want to create a bzip2 tar
> > archive then you need to use the "j" option to tar, not the "z" option,
> > like so: tar -jcvf foo.tar.bz2 foo".
>
> Yes, I know. And that works.
> To put it more clear:
> tar -jcvf foo.tar.bz2 foo --> can be opened with file-roller
> tar -zcvf foo.tar.bz foo --> CANNOT be opened with file-roller, it
> fails saying that the archive isn't a valid bzip2 archive, which is
> true, I mean, it is a bzip archive, not bzip2. The problem is that
> file-roller is doing a WRONG assumption.
No file-roller is assuming that the ".bz" suffix means that you used
bzip2, whereas you have used gzip.
> > It maybe the case that in the past file-roller automagically determined
> > the archive type, but now simply goes by file extension.
>
> Ok, but if that is the case, isn't '.tar.bz' the standard extension for
> bzip archives?
Yes. And the standard program for decompressing that is bzip2!
> How am I supposed to name a bzip archive for file-roller
> to make the right guessing?
But your archive are made with gzip, not bzip2! They should be named
foo.tar.gz!
Best, Darren
--
=====================================================================
D. D. Brierton darren@xxxxxxxxxxx www.dzr-web.com
Trying is the first step towards failure (Homer Simpson)
=====================================================================
