On Dec 3, 2004, at 21:03, Adrian Wontroba wrote:
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 02:36:09PM +, Ceri Davies wrote:
Should I expect a dump taken from 4.X to be restorable on 5.X
though?
Yes.
Phew.
I didn't even think about the possibility of dump not being forwards
compatible (8-(
Maybe a note should be
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 02:36:09PM +, Ceri Davies wrote:
> > > Should I expect a dump taken from 4.X to be restorable on 5.X though?
> > Yes.
> Phew.
I didn't even think about the possibility of dump not being forwards
compatible (8-(
In passing, you may find the buffer port useful. I spent
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 09:27:07AM -0500, Ken Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 02:24:15PM +, Ceri Davies wrote:
>
> > Should I expect a dump taken from 4.X to be restorable on 5.X though?
> > (I do).
>
> Yes.
Phew.
Ceri
--
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidit
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 02:24:15PM +, Ceri Davies wrote:
> Should I expect a dump taken from 4.X to be restorable on 5.X though?
> (I do).
Yes.
--
Ken Smith
- From there to here, from here to | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
there, funny thing
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 09:40:53PM -0500, Ken Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 10:48:43AM +1000, Joel Hatton wrote:
>
> > I'm backing up a 5.x machine at the moment with this command:
> >
> > dump -0Lau -b128 -f - /var | gzip -2 | ssh FreeBSD4 dd of=aacd0s1f.gz
> >
> > After the dump finis
On Thursday 02 December 2004 05:55, Nick Barnes wrote:
> There's no theoretical reason why the formats used by dump and restore
> shouldn't be forward and backward compatible, allowing an older
> restore (to an older filesystem type) to pick out the parts of the
> dump which make sense to it while
>There's no theoretical reason why the formats used by dump and
>restore shouldn't be forward and backward compatible, allowing
>an older restore (to an older filesystem type) to pick out the
>parts of the dump which make sense to it while ignoring parts
>which it doesn't understand.
>
>But they ar
At 2004-12-02 02:40:53+, Ken Smith writes:
> On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 10:48:43AM +1000, Joel Hatton wrote:
>
> > I'm backing up a 5.x machine at the moment with this command:
> >
> > dump -0Lau -b128 -f - /var | gzip -2 | ssh FreeBSD4 dd of=aacd0s1f.gz
> >
> > After the dump finishes, I try t
Thanks Ken (and thanks to Paul, who replied with similar info),
I can appreciate this - I shouldn't have been, but I guess I was just
caught out by the change in the filesystem type and didn't realise that
dump depended so heavily on it. I can work around, so all is well. Sorry
about the double po
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 10:48:43AM +1000, Joel Hatton wrote:
> I'm backing up a 5.x machine at the moment with this command:
>
> dump -0Lau -b128 -f - /var | gzip -2 | ssh FreeBSD4 dd of=aacd0s1f.gz
>
> After the dump finishes, I try to read the file on the 4.x destination:
>
> # gzip -dc aacd0
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I can scp the file back to the 5.x machine and it loads just fine, so what
> gives? This type of failure is somewhat scary for me right now, given that
> I may have to restore files to another destination that may not be 5.x
> based.
Is the 5.x
Hi,
I'm backing up a 5.x machine at the moment with this command:
dump -0Lau -b128 -f - /var | gzip -2 | ssh FreeBSD4 dd of=aacd0s1f.gz
After the dump finishes, I try to read the file on the 4.x destination:
# gzip -dc aacd0s1a.gz | restore -ivf -
Verify tape and initialize maps
Tape is not a d
Hi,
I'm backing up a 5.x machine at the moment with this command:
dump -0Lau -b128 -f - /var | gzip -2 | ssh FreeBSD4 dd of=aacd0s1f.gz
After the dump finishes, I try to read the file on the 4.x destination:
# gzip -dc aacd0s1a.gz | restore -ivf -
Verify tape and initialize maps
Tape is not a d
13 matches
Mail list logo
