From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 25 05:22:45 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57574106566B for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 05:22:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-nospam@yaxom.com) Received: from gw.yaxom.com (gw.yaxom.com [59.167.217.197]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8423B8FC0A for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2009 05:22:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-nospam@yaxom.com) Received: (qmail 63059 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2009 14:56:01 +1000 Received: from joker.yaxom.com (172.16.1.10) by iliad.yaxom.com with SMTP; 25 Mar 2009 14:56:01 +1000 Received: (qmail 78754 invoked by uid 1001); 25 Mar 2009 14:56:01 +1000 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 14:56:01 +1000 From: Greg Black To: "Mikhail T." References: <49C83673.3000604@aldan.algebra.com> <200903251232.11418.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <49C99204.2050601@aldan.algebra.com> <200903251334.38350.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <49C99FD2.50609@aldan.algebra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49C99FD2.50609@aldan.algebra.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i; gjb-muttsend.sh 1.7 2004-10-05 X-Uptime: 124 days X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE-p5 i386 X-Location: Brisbane, Australia; 27.49835S 152.98380E X-URL: http://www.gbch.net/gjb.html X-Blog: http://www.gbch.net/gjb/blog/ X-Image-URL: http://www.gbch.net/gjb/gjb-auug048.gif X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: EBB2 2A92 A79D 1533 AC00 3C46 5D83 B6FB 4B04 B7D6 X-Request-PGP: http://www.gbch.net/keys/4B04B7D6.asc Cc: Daniel O'Connor , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dump | restore fails: unknown tape header type 1853384566 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 05:22:45 -0000 On 2009-03-24, Mikhail T. wrote: > That's true. I just wanted to point out, that someone running dump only > (to make backups) is not going to know, whether his dumps are usable > (for whichever of the two reasons), until he needs them... Such a person is not making backups and deserves what he gets. I haven't got anything to say about dump/restore because I haven't bothered with them for years. I do know that dumps from mounted file systems will often appear to work, but will fail when it matters. This is not a bug and is expected behaviour to which the solution is obvious.