Quoth Jim Bryant on Sat, Jul 28, 2001:
> FreeBSD and GNU tar will not restore correctly to HP-UX, but dump/restore does work
>fine.
But POSIX tar (pax -x ustar) and GNU tar will not restore each
other's archives correctly, if said archives have long filenames.
However, dump and tar should be use
Jim Bryant wrote:
>
> Warner Losh wrote:
> >
> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sergey Babkin writes:
> > : > Use dump. Otherwise, you will lose.
> > :
> > : Don't use dump. Or you'll never be able to restore these backups
> > : on a non-FreeBSD machine.
> >
> > Unless it runs NetBSD, OpenBSD, S
Warner Losh wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sergey Babkin writes:
> : > Use dump. Otherwise, you will lose.
> :
> : Don't use dump. Or you'll never be able to restore these backups
> : on a non-FreeBSD machine.
>
> Unless it runs NetBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris, Linux or SunOS. ufsrestore
>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sergey Babkin writes:
: > Use dump. Otherwise, you will lose.
:
: Don't use dump. Or you'll never be able to restore these backups
: on a non-FreeBSD machine.
Unless it runs NetBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris, Linux or SunOS. ufsrestore
is pretty universal.
Warner
To Uns
Warner Losh wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> James Howard
>writes:
> : Both tar and cpio seem to have problems doing backups on my
> : server. Looking at the pax manpage, we see this:
>
> Use dump. Otherwise, you will lose.
Don't use dump. Or you'll never be able to restore these ba
Daniel O'Connor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> types:
>
> On 27-Jul-2001 Wilko Bulte wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 10:46:24PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> James
> > > Howard writes:
> > > : A lot of people said this. Why? As near as I can tell, dump isn't that
> > >
On 27-Jul-2001 Wilko Bulte wrote:
> > ie selectivity is good :)
>
> Sure.
>
> [I love my DLT4000 ;-) ]
DLT for all!
I love my imaginary multi terabyte RAID too.
(My point being the solution isn't bigger tapes but better tools..)
---
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Gene
On Fri, Jul 27, 2001 at 04:18:11PM +0930, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
> On 27-Jul-2001 Wilko Bulte wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 10:46:24PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> James
> > > Howard writes:
> > > : A lot of people said this. Why? As near as I can tell,
On 27-Jul-2001 Wilko Bulte wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 10:46:24PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> James
> > Howard writes:
> > : A lot of people said this. Why? As near as I can tell, dump isn't that
> > : great either. There is no way to exlude specific dire
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 10:46:24PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> James Howard
>writes:
> : A lot of people said this. Why? As near as I can tell, dump isn't that
> : great either. There is no way to exlude specific directories with dump
> : and it appears to be qui
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> James Howard
writes:
: A lot of people said this. Why? As near as I can tell, dump isn't that
: great either. There is no way to exlude specific directories with dump
: and it appears to be quite painful to restore a specific directory (though
: I could be wrong
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> James Howard writes:
: Both tar and cpio seem to have problems doing backups on my
: server. Looking at the pax manpage, we see this:
Use dump. Otherwise, you will lose.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in
>> Neither tar nor cpio is suitable for backup purposes.
Well, my answer wasn't sufficiently exact. The question
behind is whether you want to back up a number of files
or a file system. For the latter case you need a tool that
has sufficient knowledge of the file system.
Therefore
>> Use dump
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 02:54:52PM -0400, James Howard wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, [iso-8859-1] Lars Kühl wrote:
>
> > Neither tar nor cpio is suitable for backup purposes.
> > Use dump instead.
>
> A lot of people said this. Why? As near as I can tell, dump isn't that
> great either. There
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, James Howard wrote:
:On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, [iso-8859-1] Lars Kühl wrote:
:
:> Neither tar nor cpio is suitable for backup purposes.
:> Use dump instead.
:
:A lot of people said this. Why? As near as I can tell, dump isn't that
:great either. There is no way to exlude specif
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, [iso-8859-1] Lars Kühl wrote:
> Neither tar nor cpio is suitable for backup purposes.
> Use dump instead.
A lot of people said this. Why? As near as I can tell, dump isn't that
great either. There is no way to exlude specific directories with dump
and it appears to be qui
> Let's review. All the tar formats will truncate long filenames. All the
> cpio formats truncate the inode number. Is there a reasonable backup tool
> which does not do goofy things like that?
Neither tar nor cpio is suitable for backup purposes.
Use dump instead.
BTW this is a subject for -
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 01:26:28PM -0400, James Howard wrote:
> Both tar and cpio seem to have problems doing backups on my
> server. Looking at the pax manpage, we see this:
>
[snipped]
>
> Let's review. All the tar formats will truncate long filenames. All the
> cpio formats truncate the in
>
> Let's review. All the tar formats will truncate long filenames. All the
> cpio formats truncate the inode number. Is there a reasonable backup tool
> which does not do goofy things like that?
>
Ive always been partial to dump/ufsdump myself. And gnu tar will handle
longfiles names. The
Both tar and cpio seem to have problems doing backups on my
server. Looking at the pax manpage, we see this:
cpio The extended cpio interchange format specified in the IEEE
Std 1003.2 (``POSIX.2'') standard. The default blocksize
for this format is 5120 bytes.
20 matches
Mail list logo
