Go to the previous, next section.
tar
User reports mainly fall in three categories: portability problems,
execution bugs, and requests for enhancements. For 1.11.X, the
emphasis has been on solving portability problems, then trying to make
GNU tar more solid. Enhancements have fairly low priority,
yet I sometime slip one in just for taking a kind of rest :-).
Many bugs have been corrected since 1.11.2. If you are curious, glance through ChangeLog. I had only very few reports for things that might be new bugs not present in 1.11.2. If you are really curious, and have access to the FSF machines, see `/gd/gnu/tar/rmail/' hierarchy for all reports. Subdirectories `0', `1', `2' and `3' represent decreasing levels in priority. Most problems in there were reported against 1.10, 1.11 or 1.11.2 and still exist. The only thing I have consciously broken between 1.11.2 and 1.11.5 is `--record-number' (`-R'), because I wanted some modification to be done to `gnulib/error.c', which is outside my control. This modification is now done, but I did not revisit this area yet.
Here is my candid opinion. GNU tar has many areas of
unreliability. See `BACKLOG' for the horrorful picture of
the situation. Yet, for most users and usages, GNU tar looks
very dependable. For me as a mere user, GNU tar did not give
problems in years. And I think it offers a lot of functionality.
Many problems have been solved since 1.11.2, even if true that many
more remain to be solved. I'm not discouraged myself and feel positive
about maintaining it, simply because when I bite, that usually lasts
for quite long. I might not have all the time I would want, but I
surely have good will and am happily surrounded by many collaborating
pretesters. So, I still think GNU tar is on the winning side
in the long run.
Go to the previous, next section.