On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 05:00:01PM -0400, John Almberg wrote: > > > >Little did I know, when I posted this question, that I would > >receive such a wealth of information. I'm deeply appreciative of > >the community's willingness to share information and thank each and > >every one of your for your contributions. > > > >Now I have some reading to do. :-) > > > > > > I think there is a difference between what dump does and what tar/ > rsync do... I like the idea of doing a bit level backup, rather than > a file level backup. > > If you've never done a dump, try it locally, and then try restore, > particularly interactive restore (restore -i). It's pretty cool and I > don't think tar or rsync have anything like it.
Although some of the aspects of using dump/restore are a little clunky, it is still superior to any other method of backing up whole file systems. One of its weaknesses is that it will only back up a file system and not a subset of one such as one directory tree. You can, though, restore individual files and directory trees easily. What dump gets you is a system that knows how to handle every type of file condition correctly. None of the other quite do that. Its other weakness is that it is filesystem/OS specific. Geneally, you cannot take a dump on one OS and restore it under a different on - like you cannot dump SunOS and restore on FreeBSD or whatever. It will work over networks, though that can be slow and it doesn't recover well from network errors/failures. ////jerry > > -- John > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
