Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 20:09:22 -0600 From: Tim Judd <tajudd@gmail.com> To: Stevan Tiefert <stevan-tiefert@kabelmail.de> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: small question about tape-based dumps Message-ID: <ade45ae90910171909kd29a19ep560c6b65fbe0e22@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1255828485.5100.3.camel@x1-6-00-11-09-00-e4-00.search.b.superkabel.de> References: <1255727601.4640.4.camel@x1-6-00-11-09-00-e4-00.search.b.superkabel.de> <20091016213732.GA61433@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <ade45ae90910161943o7695d436wed8b8a69d92ef994@mail.gmail.com> <20091017232131.GB66093@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <ade45ae90910171749g5accf984j9e5d766193fb9d39@mail.gmail.com> <1255828485.5100.3.camel@x1-6-00-11-09-00-e4-00.search.b.superkabel.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/17/09, Stevan Tiefert <stevan-tiefert@kabelmail.de> wrote: > Am Samstag, den 17.10.2009, 18:49 -0600 schrieb Tim Judd: >> On 10/17/09, Jerry McAllister <jerrymc@msu.edu> wrote: >> <snip> >> >> > You do not need to. dump alrady writes that when it finishes each time. >> > If you to that, you will get a second one at that location. >> > >> > You do not need to do the rewind and mt fsf between each dump. I just >> > do it to make it very clear to myself in my scripts what I am expecting >> > and that I am doing it right. >> > >> > ////jerry >> >> <snip> >> >> If dump is the tool for tapes, and tar is named after tape archives... > > Please, no flamewar!!! Wasn't planning on starting one. Sorry if it came across that way. > >> Do both of these utilities write the *proper* EOF to whatever medium >> it's writing to? > > They both write EOF. > >> I bring this up, because dump can also write to a file on a formatted >> FS. Does the file end with this same EOF? What does tar do? > > There is only one EOF: The EOF. > > >> Why have a mt weof function if it's useless? I'm loosing the logic in >> this one, trying to make sure things work as they should. I admit >> tapes on bsd are so foreign to me, I might as well be speaking >> $another-language. > > weof is not useless. There are some file operations without writing an > EOF, like streams or something like that, but tar and dump are writing > with an EOF at the end of files :-) So it's a item for "good measure" rather than an item "as necessity" in creating backups. Thanks for all the info. I'm happy knowing more. --Tim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ade45ae90910171909kd29a19ep560c6b65fbe0e22>