[blfs-dev] about pax

Pierre Labastie pierre.labastie at neuf.fr
Fri Mar 14 01:02:05 PDT 2014

Le 13/03/2014 19:43, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> I have found 2 sources for pax:
>> - the mirbsd package, debianised by Debian (the "orig" I put in the
>> ticket). It does not build as is, because the debian "rules" (a makefile
>> actually) are shipped separately, and those rules use heavily the debian
>> packaging system. So we would first have to make a package and put it on
>> anduin. Also, According to some internet sources, the mirbsd pax program
>> does not provide the pax format (?), and so, does not pass the lsb tests.
>> - the heirloom package. You have to download the full heirloom
>> "toolchest" (not a big deal, it is just 1MB), then edit a config file (I
>> think a couple of sed's is enough), then issue various make commands (if
>> you do not want to build the whole toolchest). It seems more doable, but
>> I may miss some pros and cons, so I ask on this list whether there are
>> issues with the heirloom package (it does not seem to be much used by
>> distros)
> I've never used pax.  IMO, the only reason to have it is for LSB
> compatibility.  That would seem to rule out mirbsd, but I can't
> understand Debian not meeting LSB requirements.
> As for the heirloom toolchest, can you answer some basic questions:
> What packages are available besides pax?
A lot of utilities (bc, diff, ed...), see 
> Do they conflict with programs from other packages?
They have the same names as the utilities in coreutils or other 
packages. They default to be instaloled into otehr directories.
OTOH, I think it is possible to just copy the pax executable (it is 
statically linked by default) to its final location, so that the other 
utilities are not installed.
> I'll ask on the LSB mailing list and see if they know.

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list