Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-owner@sourceware.cygnus.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com Message-ID: <37630EDB.F2A51CCC@bigfoot.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 20:52:27 -0500 From: Jim & Jenn Dumser X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: cygwin tar to tape? References: <3731B674.63588B38@cityweb.de> <375E670E.84E188E8@ericsson.com> <37617756.14E1EAF2@vinschen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 11 Jun 1999 22:53:42 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > You get this `permission denied' when you try to read a tape, that is > written with another blocking factor than the Windows tape driver is > set to. Windows has no automatical recognition for this!!! > > You must(!) know the blocking (U*Xes typically uses 5K blocking) and > you have to set it with my `mt' command from ftp site But the "normal" tar has a blocking option. Okay, WinNT won't automagically determine block size; even the Unixes I've worked with will only figure it out if you tell it to use a block size bigger than the actual size. So why won't the standard POSIX (or whatever) calls in GNU tar correctly set the block size in cygwin? Why do we need a specially hacked version of tar/cpio/dd/mt/etc.? I would think the correct way to address this problem would be to hide the details of the "Windows way" behind the standard "Unix way." Isn't that the idea of a Unix-emulation layer? BTW - While it is not a big deal in this case and I appreciate your help, my original message was sent directly to you, Corinna, and not to the list. Since you did not ask for my permission, to copy my personal message to this list is not in the best of form. -- Jim & Jenn Dumser dumser@bigfoot.com -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com