Hi,
after some tests with amtaptetype i noticed, that the label of the tape was
gone. Is this an expected behaviour? If not, what went wrong? ;)
regards,
andreas
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 at 4:42pm, Andreas Putzo wrote
> after some tests with amtaptetype i noticed, that the label of the tape was
> gone. Is this an expected behaviour? If not, what went wrong? ;)
Well, given that amtapetype writes to the entire tape, twice, to estimate
it's size, I'd have to s
--On Monday, September 13, 2004 16:42:21 +0200 Andreas Putzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after some tests with amtaptetype i noticed, that the label of the tape was
> gone. Is this an expected behaviour? If not, what went wrong? ;)
I don't think amtapetype even bothers looking for a l
Hi,
On Monday 13 September 2004 19:20, Frank Smith wrote:
> --On Monday, September 13, 2004 16:42:21 +0200 Andreas Putzo
> > after some tests with amtaptetype i noticed, that the label of the tape
> > was gone. Is this an expected behaviour? If not, what went wrong? ;)
>
> I don't think amtapety
Hi Andreas,
On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 08:01:18PM +0200, Andreas wrote:
> > Normally you only run it on a new installation, or when you install
> > a new type of drive. It would be nice if it did check for a label
> > first and not happily clobber some of your data without warning,
> > especially
Hi, Jean-Louis,
on Donnerstag, 16. September 2004 at 13:28 you wrote to amanda-users:
JLM> Hi Andreas,
JLM> On Mon, Sep 13, 2004 at 08:01:18PM +0200, Andreas wrote:
>> > Normally you only run it on a new installation, or when you install
>> > a new type of drive. It would be nice if it did ch
