On Mon, Sep 21, 1998 at 03:26:10PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Stephen J. Carpenter said > > On Tue, Aug 04, 1998 at 11:22:29AM +0100, C.J.LAWSON wrote: > > > Hi, > > > This is a bit off topic (and sorry I cannae answer any of your > > > questions) ... Is tar ever used for backing up and if not why not .. if it > > > is why is it not the defacto standard > > > > > > --Jonathan > > > > Well...I use tar... > > > [snipped testimonial] > > > > I love tar it works great... > > > I think that last phrase should be qualified. > I've had two instances where a physical error on the disk was not caught > by tar. On both of those scenarios tar kept witting even though it was > not possible to restore past that point.
you have a point...I did this once...but.. I ALWAYS invoke tar with the v option to be verbose and I come back and check the verbose spewings of it. The one time this happened to me it had errors from that point on and I knew the backup didn't work. (which is why I have more than one tape) BTW I find I have to retensiont he tape every other backup...that is what caused the problem) > I don't use tar for backups anymore. I use BRU2000 almost exclusively. > Though I do *some* backups using alternative technologies just to keep > my data safe...I don't think that all of our backups should rely on any > one technology - use magnetic and optical, tape and disk, IDE and SCSI, > etc. I would like to try dump...and I got rdump working but... it says it will need 23 tapes to backup...when I KNO WI can get it on 1 tape.. obviously a tape density problem but...dunno how to fix it -Steve -- /* -- Stephen Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>------------ */ E-mail "Bumper Stickers": "A FREE America or a Drug-Free America: You can't have both!" "honk if you Love Linux"
