Re: Confused by restore(8) man page example
El día Monday, March 04, 2013 a las 01:12:41PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette escribió: > I'm thinking: If it is worth putting a warning into the man page, > perhaps it is worth putting a warning into the code itself, to > protect the unwary. > > Anybody here ever used Clonezilla? A nice useful tool. > > When Clonezilla runs, and when it is just about to overwrite a target > drive, it first asks you explicitly "Do you really want to proceed (Y/n)?" > > After you respond "Y" it asks you again, one more time, the same question. > > I for one have never felt put upon by these safety catches. I know they > are there for my own protection. ... In the old days of UNIX V7 when newfs(8) was still mkfs(8), there was also a last and final question "Last chance before scribbling on disk." to answer. And even after you hit ENTER to confirm, there was an internal wait of some 5 secs to let you interrupt with Ctrl-C in case of error. Just remembering those days :-) matthias -- Matthias Apitz | /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign: www.asciiribbon.org E-mail: g...@unixarea.de | \ / - No HTML/RTF in E-mail WWW: http://www.unixarea.de/ | X - No proprietary attachments phone: +49-170-4527211 | / \ - Respect for open standards ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Confused by restore(8) man page example
In message <20130304151707.gc76...@jerrymc.net>, Jerry McAllister wrote: >This and the previous reply are correct. This example shows >a correct way to use 'restore -r' > >The '-r' flag causes it to write where you are cd-ed to without any >warning what you are doing or overwriting. If there are other files >in the directory that is to receive the files from a 'restore -r' has >other files, you may unexpectedly overwrite some of them. I'm thinking: If it is worth putting a warning into the man page, perhaps it is worth putting a warning into the code itself, to protect the unwary. Anybody here ever used Clonezilla? A nice useful tool. When Clonezilla runs, and when it is just about to overwrite a target drive, it first asks you explicitly "Do you really want to proceed (Y/n)?" After you respond "Y" it asks you again, one more time, the same question. I for one have never felt put upon by these safety catches. I know they are there for my own protection. Maybe restore should have something similar, along with some special option to disable the extra security check, you know, for use in non-interactive batch scripts. >Also, if >you are not cd-ed in to the correct place (the mount point, for example) >using the '-r' will quickly write all over whatever directory you >are cd-ed to without warning.In other words '-r' causes it to >splat out everything right where you are without warning and too fast >to interrupt it before too much damage is done. I understand. This is quite obviously different than "rm -fr *", but I can see how it could be equally disasterous. Regards, rfg ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Confused by restore(8) man page example
In message <63618304-837e-4b76-8157-d99c744ac...@wolfhut.org>, Ben Cottrell wrote: >I guess the same text in the man page could be read several >different ways! The way I read it (which may or may not be >correct) is that the example given is an example of how to >use it *correctly*. It sounds to me like it's warning against >deviating too far from the steps given in the example. > >I can see as how the text might allow other interpretations, >though! Thanks for the response Ben. As others have pointed out, it would probably be less confusing if the material starting with "An example:" were in a different paragraph. As the text stands now, first we have a sentence that gives a frightening warning about possible mangling of a disk/partition if restore -r is not used correctly, and then immediately following that is "An example:" with an example of _correct_ usage. I hope and trust that folks can understand my earlier befuddlement. Anyway, I have just now filed a PR suggesting a new paragraph at the appropriate point in the man page. Thanks to all who responded. Regards, rfg ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Confused by restore(8) man page example
Subject: Re: Confused by restore(8) man page example On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 10:08:37AM +, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: > On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 01:47:24 -0800 > "Ronald F. Guilmette" wrote: > > > > > In the man page for restore(8) I see the following: > > > > The -r flag ... can be detrimental to one's health if > > not used carefully (not to mention the disk). An example: > > > > newfs /dev/da0s1a > > mount /dev/da0s1a /mnt > > cd /mnt > > > > restore rf /dev/sa0 > > > > Personally, I utterly fail to see what point the author is attempting > > to illustrate with the above example. I mean what part of this, exactly, > > may be "detrimental to one's health" ? It's an enigma to me. > > There's nothing wrong with the example. I think "An example:" > should be in a new paragraph to make it clear that it is not related to > the warning. The detrimental effects cut in when you use -r on a filesystem > that is not pristine, or at least in the expected state for restoring an > incremental dump. This and the previous reply are correct. This example shows a correct way to use 'restore -r' The '-r' flag causes it to write where you are cd-ed to without any warning what you are doing or overwriting. If there are other files in the directory that is to receive the files from a 'restore -r' has other files, you may unexpectedly overwrite some of them. Also, if you are not cd-ed in to the correct place (the mount point, for example) using the '-r' will quickly write all over whatever directory you are cd-ed to without warning.In other words '-r' causes it to splat out everything right where you are without warning and too fast to interrupt it before too much damage is done. I often do a 'restore -r' into an existing -eg not newly newfs-ed, directory, but have to make sure I am clear about what I am doing. For example, I usually keep a large (large for my little stuff) drive mounted as '/work'. Within that filesystem I may create a directory such as './unroll' eg '/work/unroll' or some other similar name and mass restore a dump in to it using 'restore -r' so I can easily shuffle files around from the backup in to several new directories. If there are a bunch of destination directories, it is easier this way than doing a 'restore -i'. But, as said, I have to be careful just how I am using it. It works well. Have fun, jerry > > -- > Steve O'Hara-Smith > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Confused by restore(8) man page example
On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 01:47:24 -0800 "Ronald F. Guilmette" wrote: > > > In the man page for restore(8) I see the following: > > The -r flag ... can be detrimental to one's health if > not used carefully (not to mention the disk). An example: > > newfs /dev/da0s1a > mount /dev/da0s1a /mnt > cd /mnt > > restore rf /dev/sa0 > > > Personally, I utterly fail to see what point the author is attempting > to illustrate with the above example. I mean what part of this, exactly, > may be "detrimental to one's health" ? It's an enigma to me. There's nothing wrong with the example. I think "An example:" should be in a new paragraph to make it clear that it is not related to the warning. The detrimental effects cut in when you use -r on a filesystem that is not pristine, or at least in the expected state for restoring an incremental dump. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Confused by restore(8) man page example
On Mar 4, 2013, at 01:47, "Ronald F. Guilmette" wrote: > All I see is a pre-existing BSD partition being explicitly newfs'ed and > then mounted, followed by some stuff being restored to that (clean) > BSD partition from whatever is currently sitting on the tape drive > called /dev/sa0. > > So? What possible problem could derive from merely that? I don't see > any. I guess the same text in the man page could be read several different ways! The way I read it (which may or may not be correct) is that the example given is an example of how to use it *correctly*. It sounds to me like it's warning against deviating too far from the steps given in the example. I can see as how the text might allow other interpretations, though! ~Ben (who is always careful to avoid using out-of-range values with mktime() when setting up lunch with promptness sticklers in Riyadh...) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Confused by restore(8) man page example
In the man page for restore(8) I see the following: The -r flag ... can be detrimental to one's health if not used carefully (not to mention the disk). An example: newfs /dev/da0s1a mount /dev/da0s1a /mnt cd /mnt restore rf /dev/sa0 Personally, I utterly fail to see what point the author is attempting to illustrate with the above example. I mean what part of this, exactly, may be "detrimental to one's health" ? It's an enigma to me. All I see is a pre-existing BSD partition being explicitly newfs'ed and then mounted, followed by some stuff being restored to that (clean) BSD partition from whatever is currently sitting on the tape drive called /dev/sa0. So? What possible problem could derive from merely that? I don't see any. What's the problem? I'm confused. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
