<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: cpio vs tar in Operating System - Linux</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/cpio-vs-tar/m-p/4168377#M32033</link>
    <description>check out this link&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="http://rightsock.com/~kjw/Ramblings/tar_v_cpio.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://rightsock.com/~kjw/Ramblings/tar_v_cpio.html&lt;/A&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:25:55 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Jeeshan</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2008-03-26T16:25:55Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>cpio vs tar</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/cpio-vs-tar/m-p/4168375#M32031</link>
      <description>hello,&lt;BR /&gt;I need to replicate several directories of a NFS files system coming from a SFU NAS file server.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The destination machine is RHEL4.&lt;BR /&gt;I mounted both files systems (source and destination) on a HPUX 11i machine.&lt;BR /&gt;I tried to use cpio (as I'm used in the UX-UX transfer) like this:&lt;BR /&gt;find . -depth -print |cpio -pdum /aaa/xfer/&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;but it returns errors with sym links.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I tried to use tar like this (as suggested by the man page):&lt;BR /&gt;tar cvf - . |( cd /aaa/xfer/ ; tar tvf - )&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;and it seems working fine even if slower than cpio.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So my idea is to use tar.&lt;BR /&gt;Someone knows if tar is not suitable for this pourpose or some other reason to prefer cpio.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I avoided to mount directly the source file system on a RHEL4 machine because the GNU cpio does not recognize the SFU as a native UX file system and returns more errors.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;thank you&lt;BR /&gt;Kind Regards&lt;BR /&gt;Romano&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:08:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/cpio-vs-tar/m-p/4168375#M32031</guid>
      <dc:creator>romano r</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-03-26T15:08:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: cpio vs tar</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/cpio-vs-tar/m-p/4168376#M32032</link>
      <description>I'd expect "tar" to work fine, for some&lt;BR /&gt;values of "tar".  The native HP-UX "tar"&lt;BR /&gt;program may have trouble with long names, for&lt;BR /&gt;example, so "pax" or GNU "tar" might be more&lt;BR /&gt;suitable.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;gt; The destination machine is RHEL4.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Why drag the HP-UX system into the picture?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;gt; [...] because the GNU cpio does not [...]&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;But if you use NFS on the Linux system, ...?</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:57:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/cpio-vs-tar/m-p/4168376#M32032</guid>
      <dc:creator>Steven Schweda</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-03-26T15:57:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: cpio vs tar</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/cpio-vs-tar/m-p/4168377#M32033</link>
      <description>check out this link&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="http://rightsock.com/~kjw/Ramblings/tar_v_cpio.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://rightsock.com/~kjw/Ramblings/tar_v_cpio.html&lt;/A&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:25:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-linux/cpio-vs-tar/m-p/4168377#M32033</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jeeshan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-03-26T16:25:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

