On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 21:25, Matt Morgan wrote:
> >
> > If you have a C compiler and the gnutar source, you don't have
> > to reverse-engineer anything to make a program that uses it's
> > format. And by having the actual source you get the exact
> > specification, not what someone mistakenly thought it was
> > when they read the document a hundred years ago.
>
> The really important part of this argument, to a professional
> archivist, is the part where you say "if you have." No archivist would
> build a repository around the expectation that C compilers and gnutar
> source will be usable and readable in 100 years.
OK, even things written on stone tablets have been lost
to humanity. In a fast-changing world, the best approach
is to be prepared to change with it. C has been available,
affordable, and usable for 30 years already and I've used
it personally on a wide range of processor types from 8 to
64 bits, so I don't think another 100 years is out of
the question, but still the right approach for digital
content is to be prepared to copy and convert fairly often
to ensure that the media and format remains useful. Conversions
used to be painful in the days before networks were common
because you had to get the old and new media somehow connected
to the same computer. Now all you have to do is copy to
your new system before the last of the old ones breaks, and
chances are good that the next storage media will be much
faster, cheaper, and more reliable than whatever you might
choose today.
> > I'd probably write ISO9660 CD's but you'll lose any OS-specific
> > attributes in the process. If you expect it to be read by
> > some currently-unknown OS, I guess that wouldn't matter and
>
> I guess it depends on what you mean. For present needs I do need to
> preserve file ownership and permissions.
You'll lose those on an iso9660 filesystem.
> It would be nice if someone can open it in WinZip, but it's not
> super-critical. I like that the Gnome archive manager seems to be able
> to open tar, gnutar, ustar, etc. But again, not critical.
> I didn't intend to make this super-complicated.
It is a generally interesting topic.
> I think the short
> answer to my question is "no": I can pick a standards-based archive
> format or I can pick a convenient and well-supported one. That's OK.
Star can do what you want, but I'd only trust the very latest
version and what comes with fedora is pretty far out of date. But
for all practical uses, gnutar would be fine too.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
