On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 10:04:57PM +1100, Mark Hannon wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> This is exactly what I was seeing! (I finally twigged when I did a
> low level backup of a filesystem and then noticed that my level 9
> backup was the same length as the night before ....)
>
> Thanks, Mark
>
>
> "Crist J . Clark" wrote:
> >
> > I did some more checking on how dump(8) works. If you dump to an
> > existing file, the file can never get smaller. That is, the file is
> > not truncated. I'll look at whether there is a good reason for this.
> > Is this actually what you were describing?
I don't really see a reason why dump(8) needs to work that way. Here
is an untested patch that should change that behavior.
Index: src/sbin/dump/tape.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /export/ncvs/src/sbin/dump/tape.c,v
retrieving revision 1.12.2.1
diff -u -r1.12.2.1 tape.c
--- src/sbin/dump/tape.c 1 Aug 2001 06:29:35 -0000 1.12.2.1
+++ src/sbin/dump/tape.c 4 Dec 2001 11:24:12 -0000
@@ -609,10 +609,10 @@
}
#ifdef RDUMP
while ((tapefd = (host ? rmtopen(tape, 2) :
- pipeout ? 1 : open(tape, O_WRONLY|O_CREAT, 0666))) < 0)
+ pipeout ? 1 : open(tape, O_WRONLY | O_CREAT | O_TRUNC, 0666)))
+< 0)
#else
while ((tapefd = (pipeout ? 1 :
- open(tape, O_WRONLY|O_CREAT, 0666))) < 0)
+ open(tape, O_WRONLY | O_CREAT| O_TRUNC, 0666))) < 0)
#endif
{
msg("Cannot open output \"%s\".\n", tape);
Is there any reason we don't want to truncate the file? Does O_TRUNC
not work well of the file is a tape device or something?
--
Crist J. Clark | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/ | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
