119
Bonus question: With or without - ?
this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2024
119 points (86.1% liked)
Linuxsucks
353 readers
1 users here now
Rules:
- FOSS advocates and Linux evangelists aren't welcome. -We ask that you block us.
- Moderation is heavy handed. Try to stay on topic (that is LINUXSUCKS!).
- No Complaining Mute the sub if users, content, or rules bother you *it's ok to report rule violations
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
When I point an (un)packing program at a packed archive, the default action should be to fucking unpack it.
And when I point it at anything else, it should pack it into the default format.
Everything else can be options.
The problem is, tar isn't a packing program, it's a tape archive program that's been repurposed for general files-to-file archival with optional compression plugins
At this point, if it were written today, it probably would behave as you suggest, but changing it now would break too many things that use it
Then it would've been time to deprecate it for this purpose, and use something sensible instead, say about 13 years ago.
All the old stuff can then keep using tar, but the nicer option can become the standard for user-friendly file extraction.
"The world should conform to my expectations, not long-standing conventions!"
But if you engage your thinking meat, you might just discover the magic of alias untar='tar xvf'.
"long-standing conventions" is how you end up with Internet Explorer still pre-installed on Windows Server 2025.
And when was the last time you used the tar "tape archiver" to archive things on tape?
Magnetic tapes are still being used as long-term storage, as backups for example. They are inexpensive, compact, have zero moving parts, and are more durable than optical media. All you have to do is keep them in a location that is around room temperature, relatively dry, and away from magnets.
But that's not really what tar does. It simply collects the input files and writes them to a single contiguous data stream -- a file not unlike an actual tape. It's worked like that for, I shit you not, 45 years, and it is very much a single project holding up modern technology situation. I fear to imagine what would happen if it were to change.
What the fuck zero moving parts? Are you high?
That would be the sticky tape. Also good for long term storage.
You may not have heard this, but tar can be used to work with non-tape archives.
In fact, non-tape archives are the overwhelmingly popular workflow.
Does having to explain the history of a tool to understand why it works that way make it more or less useful?
Neither, but understanding that and the ubiquity of that tool might help understand why it can't simply be changed
Why are long standing conventions a good thing? Slavery was a longstanding convention.
No human rights are violated by tar functioning the way it does, but changing it would cause a lot of problems without good reason since you could just as easily write an alias or wrapper to simplify the usage
-xzf extract ze file
Zip file.
dtrx = Do The Right eXtraction
Check your local package manager
Tar --rfx
Welpi failed. R isn't valid in this context.
Shit r was mine too. Thought it was recursive
Extract recursively?
r adds files to an existing compressed file.
So we are saying add a file (r), target this file (t), extract this file (x)
Thank you for that insight :)
tar -xzyzrzwzucuauazdufsomething
tar -xvf filename I don’t even know what it does but I’ve memorised it.
x for extract v is verbose f for file input
-zxf for me, I've mostly used it on gzipped archives
In every tar: xf .
Although I do admit looking for 'gtar' and using it first. #onlyUnixUsersGetIt
just x bro
tar: Refusing to read archive contents from terminal (missing -f option?)
BOOM
lol
Easy peasy.
tar -h
The real question: GNU tar or not?
I remember using a script as a solution, so I'd be a gonner!
This is why i always install ouch. Tar is for course brain
This one would be no problem.
Do you know which version of tar it is?
Unix or GNU/Linux?
Just use - in the statement to cover your bases.