On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Gene Heskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And I, like an idiot, didn't notice we were discussing an NFS problem, which > may be another manifestation of the same problem, but that patch does not > address what happens when the linux device mapper decides to move an LVM2 > volume from 253,0 ro 254,0.
The patch JLM posted won't fix it, but his proposed command-line option will. > Thats why I'm asking about Schiling Tar, aka S-Tar. Does that fix the > problem?, and can amanda use it? Yes, but its semantics are very different from GNU Tar -- it's not a drop-in fix. > The ultimate weapon of course in any philosophical war, which this is, is to > fork tar and fix it if STar isn't usable. At this point, and while I'm not > capable of doing it, I'm not a bit allergic to the fork idea. Its bitten me > so often that I'll alpha test anybodies efforts in that regard. Gleefully. Sure, but threatening a fork is un-diplomatic, and not called for just yet. Let's start with a concerted public-relations effort :) > Humm, didn't we have some scripts that could inspect and repair the index > files when this happened? Probably lost when I woke up one morning and found > my well developed FC6 install wasn't re-bootable, LSN0 on /dev/hda had one > non-zero byte left in it. Yep -- it's called tar-snapshot-edit, and it's available in recent releases of GNU Tar. Just google for it. Dustin -- Storage Software Engineer http://www.zmanda.com
