-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2006-12-06 at 12:45 -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> > I read once that the cpio archive is more solid.
> >
> > If the tar.gz archive is broken, all of it is broken. The backup
> > program that claimed this explained that instead they used cpio,
> > compressing each file separately: thus only one file would be
> > irretrievable, not the whole archive.
>
> But the tradeoff with per-file compression is that you typically get
> rather poor compression for archives that contain many small files.
Yes, the compression ratio is a bit worse, but that's something I will
happily sacrifice for safety where backups are concerned.
I have some backups of an entire HD done using nearly a hundred
floppies - you can imagine when - and the whole backup is still fully
retrievable, although some floppies have errors. They were made with
PCBackup (dos version). It had compression with a data recovery
algorithm that seems to work well after the years; the data recovery
feature had a lower compression ratio, of course.
I wish we had something similar for Linux - with current media,
obviously :-)
> I wish I could make "info" go away. I hate it. In addition to the
> atrocious tools used to access it,
Try "pinfo" instead. It doesn't make the contents better, of course, just
easier to navigate ;-)
- --
Cheers,
Carlos E. R.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76
iD8DBQFFd4vvtTMYHG2NR9URAhQ/AJ9phbE57Bcgi0SCQ4gH/PqmAw5GuACeOR2h
z6DfaehDxkDCl/URONNZJnE=
=PpZs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
