>I can now rest in peace knowing that my backups will not be destroyed
>by one errant bit :-)
As long as you're using GNU tar, which I realize you are. But just to
make sure everyone else understands, system dump programs may or may
not be so amused with a missing chunk of data. I've seen both amazing
ability to recover and core dumps at the slightest whiff of a problem.
>... Before
>amanda, I used my tape drive's hardware compression, but that doesn't
>seem to quite play nicely with amanda.
I use hardware compression. Why do you think it's a problem?
>>... you can use wrappers around the compression program and
>>let them decide, for instance ...
>How would such a wrapper work, since there's still no way to vary how
>it's called per-filesystem?
I didn't think that all the way through. I guess you'd probably do the
wrapper around GNU tar, tell Amanda to **not** compress and have the
wrapper decide what to do since it is given the file system. That would
have issues during a restore, though, since Amanda doesn't realize it's
really compressed and would not decompress it.
Or I guess the GNU tar wrapper could leave a flag for the compression
wrapper saying what file system was being done, then Amanda would not
be lied to.
All of which is pretty icky and not worth pursuing. Effort would be
better spent implementing (and finding :-) the FILTER-API.
>John Goerzen
John R. Jackson, Technical Software Specialist, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
