John R. Vanderpool: >> Now, if you want to just untar with out having directories removed -- >just curious why did you say directories and not just files here?
I blame it on a quickly written response. Many pages on the web have the _wrong_ idea of what a 'back' should be. A few pages I've read, physically cringing, said "Use --newer=DATE-OR-FILE to do differential backups!"; which is wrong because files might get moved, in which case their dates don't change (e.g. file "blue" gets moved/renamed to "red", the websites procedure would never have a file "red"). John R. Vanderpool: >> don't use the --listed-incremental option! The file deleted on >> Tuesday will not be removed with the Wednesday morning restore. This >> is helpful when a user deletes a file accidentally and only a partial >> restore is needed. >ah, so you are saying this kicks in only if you use -x and --listed-incremental at the same time, i thought it had something to do with using it with >-c & --listed-incremental Yes. If you never use "--listed-incremental" with extract, it will operate like a normal tar file. I agree that the info pages are a bit confusing, only through previous knowledge of other backup systems and experimentation did I learn that tar works just the way I want it! :-) -- John Thomas McDole _______________________________________________ Bug-tar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-tar
