From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Sep 10 14:19:53 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C60016A41A
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:19:53 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jhs@berklix.org)
Received: from thin.berklix.org (thin.berklix.org [194.246.123.68])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78E8B13C461
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:19:52 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jhs@berklix.org)
Received: from js.berklix.net (p549A738C.dip.t-dialin.net [84.154.115.140])
	(authenticated bits=128)
	by thin.berklix.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l8AEJgsd017539
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:19:43 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from jhs@berklix.org)
Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (fire.js.berklix.net [192.168.91.41])
	by js.berklix.net (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l8AEJaQc039112
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:19:36 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from jhs@berklix.org)
Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (localhost.js.berklix.net [127.0.0.1])
	by fire.js.berklix.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l8AEJZmD058242
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:19:35 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from jhs@fire.js.berklix.net)
Message-Id: <200709101419.l8AEJZmD058242@fire.js.berklix.net>
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <74423CD8-F9C1-454D-83BB-0114402C2CCC@jump-ing.de> 
References: <E1ISdQi-000GkC-4v@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
	<20070904233246.GA2409@epia-2.farid-hajji.net>
	<E1ISnig-000Nbm-Ep@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
	<043a01c7f202$a7ad0920$f7071b60$@co.uk>
	<E1IU10R-000MRT-T8@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
	<046801c7f229$a4534510$ecf9cf30$@co.uk>
	<E1IUcXc-000NdZ-LH@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
	<E1IUePt-000P2R-RM@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
	<74423CD8-F9C1-454D-83BB-0114402C2CCC@jump-ing.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Markus Hitter <mah@jump-ing.de>
	message dated "Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:14:00 +0200."
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:19:35 +0200
From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.org>
Subject: Re: dump problems 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:19:53 -0000

Markus Hitter wrote:
> 
> Am 10.09.2007 um 10:14 schrieb Danny Braniss:
> 
> > so here are some questions:
> > 	- is the readers/writer split realy needed now? my guess it was
> >           put in in the old days to get tapes streaming - which is  
> > btw,
> >           what's not working.
> 
> Before you put a lot of efforts into this: Why don't you just let  
> dump/restore die and put functionality, which is needed and unique to  
> dump, into tar?

Bundling the kitchen sink has worried some since first cries of
"Emacs = Bloat": Some believe.  Some don't. Religious.

> Tar is far more popular, today's world is  
> multiplatform, today's world is multi-filesystem and if you rewrite  
> dump, you force admins to rewrite their scripts anyways.
> 
> I've always considered it as sub-optimal to have several tools for  
> one task.

Depend if others agree one definition of task.

I wouldnt merge dump & restor either.
Principle of least suprise,
Maintain portability of people & tools between the many flavours of Unix.

-- 
Julian Stacey. Munich Computer Consultant, BSD Unix C Linux. http://berklix.com
	Ihr Rauch=mein allergischer Kopfschmerz. Dump cigs 4 snuff.