From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Mar 28  8:37:44 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from cheops.anu.edu.au (cheops.anu.edu.au [150.203.149.24])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9497214C87
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Sun, 28 Mar 1999 08:37:40 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from avalon@cheops.anu.edu.au)
Received: (from avalon@localhost)
	by cheops.anu.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id CAA21375;
	Mon, 29 Mar 1999 02:37:12 +1000 (EST)
From: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au>
Message-Id: <199903281637.CAA21375@cheops.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: another ufs panic..
To: mishania@demos.net (Mikhail A. Sokolov)
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 02:37:12 +1000 (EST)
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <19990328201339.A14768@demos.su> from "Mikhail A. Sokolov" at Mar 28, 99 08:13:39 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

In some mail from Mikhail A. Sokolov, sie said:
> 
> On Mon, Mar 29, 1999 at 12:18:47AM +0900, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> # > ...there have been substantial ufs improvements in 3.x, yes ?
> # No. Nobody has been complaining about ufs. Hell, that's the fs we
> # all use. We wouldn't be *able* to do anything if it was so buggy.
> 
> You didn't look into at least 2 month old archives, did you? 
> Pardon to comment in such a useless way, but it sometimes hurt people wouldn't
> read before answering. 
> 
> Darren, people who moved from 2.x to 3.x-stable are reporting nicely about 
> their systems, might be you should as well. Again, why did you use pax but
> cpio and such?

Because dump/restore weren't performing well with "cp /usr /mnt/usr"

darren


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message