Hello Paul, thanks for your comment!
Something like that looks reasonable.
One major comment, though, is that the output of
tar should be parsable, i.e., it should be possible
to look at the output, figure out what format it is,
and parse it reliably. The current format doesn't have
that
On 2012-05-03, at 6:10 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Something like that looks reasonable.
One major comment, though, is that the output of
tar should be parsable, i.e., it should be possible
to look at the output, figure out what format it is,
and parse it reliably. The current format doesn't
When doing an incremental backup the other day I noticed that
directories were listed as new when I knew they weren't. I
investigated this a bit closer, and from what I can tell, this looks
like a bug in tar 1.26. (As packaged for Fedora 17 in
tar-1.26-5.fc17.x86_64.) I'm worried when my backup
Sergey Poznyakoff:
Yes, can you please send me the snapshot file?
Of course. I placed it on my FTP site rather than attaching it since
it is so big. But I'll send it to you off-list; I imagine not all
subscribers would appreciate it.
Having two copies
(before and after creating the tarball)
While investigating a problem I just reported about wrong inode
numbers in snapshot files, I also noted that tar 1.26 sometimes failed
to do backup when starting with a snapshot file from tar 1.22. If the
problem is some kind of memory corruption, this might actually be the
same problem as the
