Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 09:34:47 +0100 From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org (FreeBSD-current users) Subject: Re: Good name for a dump(8) option? Message-ID: <Mutt.19970203093447.j@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <199702030304.UAA19877@rocky.mt.sri.com>; from Nate Williams on Feb 2, 1997 20:04:37 -0700 References: <Mutt.19970201144514.j@uriah.heep.sax.de> <199702030304.UAA19877@rocky.mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Nate Williams wrote: > > i've implemented an option to dump(8) to bypass all tape length > > considerations, and dump straight to the end-of-tape indication, as it > > is probably most appropriate for all today's tape drives (due to > > compression and/or multiple backups per volume). > > Oooh, I *like* it. Now, if you can only send the code to Sun and have > them use it as well. :) :) The code is already in there, it's only that i'm enforcing to use it. If you call the old dump(8) with a tape length that is way too large, it will do exactly the same (except of the bogus ``will be on 0.01 tapes'' message i'm avoiding). -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Mutt.19970203093447.j>