Use of tar in LFS books

Randy McMurchy randy at
Sun Aug 28 08:53:32 PDT 2005

Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 08/28/05 10:44 CST:

> For the glibc-linuxthreads package we use 'tar -xjvf' and for the
> bash-docs package we use 'tar -zxf'. Should we continue to use verbosity
> for one and not the other? 

I believe the -v option should not be used on either. My philosophy
is that if something is being untarred to a final resting place
(i.e., somewhere in /usr), then use it as this creates a log of the
installed files. However, in the instance where something is being
untarred into a source tree which will later be removed (the case
with both glibc and bash), then it should not be used as any errors
are more easily recognizable during the untar. No log of the untar
is necessary for stuff going only into a source tree.

As far as using the -z or -j switch, I don't care. But you are
right Jeremy, in that it isn't needed.


rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686]
10:49:00 up 148 days, 10:22, 3 users, load average: 0.47, 0.19, 0.18

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list