|[ << ]||[ < ]||[ Up ]||[ > ]||[ >> ]||[Top]||[Contents]||[Index]||[ ? ]|
(This message will disappear, once this node revised.)
cpio archive formats, like
tar, do have maximum
file name lengths. The binary and old ASCII formats have a maximum file
length of 256, and the new ASCII and CRC ASCII formats have a max
file length of 1024. GNU
cpio can read and write archives
with arbitrary file name lengths, but other
may crash unexplainedly trying to read them.
tar handles symbolic links in the form in which it comes in BSD;
cpio doesn’t handle symbolic links in the form in which it comes
in System V prior to SVR4, and some vendors may have added symlinks
to their system without enhancing
cpio to know about them.
Others may have enhanced it in a way other than the way I did it
at Sun, and which was adopted by AT&T (and which is, I think, also
present in the
cpio that Berkeley picked up from AT&T and put
into a later BSD release—I think I gave them my changes).
(SVR4 does some funny stuff with
tar; basically, its
tar format input, and write it on output, and it
probably handles symbolic links. They may not have bothered doing
anything to enhance
tar as a result.)
cpio handles special files; traditional
tar comes with V7, System III, System V, and BSD source;
cpio comes only with System III, System V, and later BSD
(4.3-tahoe and later).
tar’s way of handling multiple hard links to a file can handle
file systems that support 32-bit i-numbers (e.g., the BSD file system);
cpios way requires you to play some games (in its “binary”
format, i-numbers are only 16 bits, and in its “portable ASCII” format,
they’re 18 bits—it would have to play games with the "file system ID"
field of the header to make sure that the file system ID/i-number pairs
of different files were always different), and I don’t know which
cpios, if any, play those games. Those that don’t might get
confused and think two files are the same file when they’re not, and
make hard links between them.
tars way of handling multiple hard links to a file places only
one copy of the link on the tape, but the name attached to that copy
is the only one you can use to retrieve the file;
way puts one copy for every link, but you can retrieve it using any
of the names.
What type of check sum (if any) is used, and how is this calculated.
See the attached manual pages for
tar uses a checksum which is the sum of all the bytes in the
tar header for a file;
cpio uses no checksum.
If anyone knows why
cpiowas made when
tarwas present at the unix scene,
cpio first showed up in PWB/UNIX 1.0; no
generally-available version of UNIX had
tar at the time. I don’t
know whether any version that was generally available within AT&T
tar, or, if so, whether the people within AT&T who did
cpio knew about it.
On restore, if there is a corruption on a tape
tar will stop at
that point, while
cpio will skip over it and try to restore the
rest of the files.
The main difference is just in the command syntax and header format.
tar is a little more tape-oriented in that everything is blocked
to start on a record boundary.
Is there any differences between the ability to recover crashed archives between the two of them. (Is there any chance of recovering crashed archives at all.)
Theoretically it should be easier under
tar since the blocking
lets you find a header with some variation of ‘dd skip=nn’.
cpio’s and variations have an option to just
search for the next file header after an error with a reasonable chance
of resyncing. However, lots of tape driver software won’t allow you to
continue past a media error which should be the only reason for getting
out of sync unless a file changed sizes while you were writing the
If anyone knows why
cpiowas made when
tarwas present at the unix scene, please tell me about this too.
Probably because it is more media efficient (by not blocking everything
and using only the space needed for the headers where
always uses 512 bytes per file header) and it knows how to archive
You might want to look at the freely available alternatives. The
major ones are
pax, each of which have their own extensions with some
Sparse files were
tarred as sparse files (which you can
easily test, because the resulting archive gets smaller, and
cpio can no longer read it).
|[ << ]||[ < ]||[ Up ]||[ > ]||[ >> ]|
This document was generated on March 24, 2021 using texi2html 5.0.