Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!haven.umd.edu!uunet!amdahl!hip-hop!dfox From: dfox@hip-hop.suvl.ca.us (David Fox) Subject: Re: File Truncation Philosophy References: <C4tJ6C.C17@ns1.nodak.edu> <CGD.93Apr1173018@eden.CS.Berkeley.EDU> Organization: Hip-Hop BBS, Sunnyvale California Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1993 23:26:40 GMT Message-ID: <C4vqGG.6nB@hip-hop.suvl.ca.us> Lines: 31 cgd@eden.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Chris G. Demetriou) wrote: >In article <C4tJ6C.C17@ns1.nodak.edu> tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu (Mark Tinguely) writes: > >despite all the attempts to make it so, GNU tar is *not* >a valid backup/restore tool. > >dump/restore is, they're not at all hard to use, >and, best of all, they work *marvelously* (esp. if what you're dumping/ >restoring to/from is local-- apparently there are some bugs in the remote >tape handling, but they're fixable). dump was the first tool I tried. It became unusable (using floppies) for a full backup because it likes to spawn a new task for each new volume, and after about 20 new volumes, the system starts running out of memory (4mb/ 5mb swap). So I had to discard it. What makes dump better than tar? >chris >-- >Chris G. Demetriou cgd@cs.berkeley.edu > > "386bsd as depth first search: whenever you go to fix something you > find that 3 more things are actually broken." -- Adam Glass -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- David E. Fox email: hip-hop!dfox@amdahl.com 5479 Castle Manor Drive San Jose, CA 95129 Thanks for letting me change the magnetic