From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 3 07:22:36 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AE4EEFC for ; Fri, 3 Apr 2015 07:22:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.145]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEA46E62 for ; Fri, 3 Apr 2015 07:22:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ppp103-111.static.internode.on.net (HELO lillith-iv.ovirt.dyndns.ws) ([150.101.103.111]) by ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net with ESMTP; 03 Apr 2015 17:52:27 +1030 X-Envelope-From: ws@au.dyndns.ws X-Envelope-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from predator-ii.buffyverse (predator-ii.buffyverse [172.17.17.136]) by lillith-iv.ovirt.dyndns.ws (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t337MImT012492; Fri, 3 Apr 2015 17:52:19 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from ws@au.dyndns.ws) Message-ID: <1428045738.40345.12.camel@au.dyndns.ws> Subject: Re: Dump(8) does not do incremental From: Wayne Sierke To: Warren Block Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 17:52:18 +1030 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.10 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (lillith-iv.ovirt.dyndns.ws [172.17.17.142]); Fri, 03 Apr 2015 17:52:19 +1030 (CST) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.75 on 172.17.17.142 X-Scanned-By: SpamAssassin 3.004000(2014-02-07) X-Scanned-By: ClamAV X-Spam-Score: -1 () ALL_TRUSTED Cc: Olivier Nicole , "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 07:22:36 -0000 On Thu, 2015-04-02 at 21:51 -0600, Warren Block wrote: > On Fri, 3 Apr 2015, Olivier Nicole wrote: > > > Thanks Warren, > > > >>> Is there any reason why dump would not do incremental when used with -f -? > >> -u to update /etc/dumpdates after a success? > > > > That was it. But I now wonder what was the twisted reason behind that > > behaviour (that is not documented, man pages mention the various > > levels, not saying they are not working unless -u); I understand one > > may want to not implement the incremental dumps, but the default > > should enable them. > > Hmm. It should certainly be mentioned in the man page. I only remember > -u because I usually have to look up what it does. I suppose the man page is not explicit in its explanation of the "Dump levels" option. Perhaps: "tells dump to copy all files new or modified since the last dump of any lower level." could be changed to: "tells dump to copy all files new or modified since the last dump of any lower level as recorded in dumpdates." or: "tells dump to copy all files new or modified since the last dump (in dumpdates) of any lower level." etc. (And while we're there perhaps "of any lower level" can become "at any lower level"?)