Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!uunet!bfmny0!tneff
From: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: 386/ix User-level Performance??
Message-ID: <14650@bfmny0.UU.NET>
Date: 11 Sep 89 05:11:35 GMT
References: <472@telesoft.telesoft.com> <6750@stiatl.UUCP> <105@dumbcat.UUCP> <1144@virtech.UUCP>
Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Organization: ^
Lines: 20
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:


 1. I don't know whether the backup(1) shell script Interactive supplies
is the same as the one I got from AT&T 3.2, but I haven't seen the bug
in question on my system.

 2. Having said that, anyone with a working knowledge of UNIX utilities
can put together a useful backup proc.  I have one that combines full
and partial capabilities as well as direct-to-tape or over-the-network;
all the same script linked to several different names and it checks $0
for specific settings, that way I don't have to maintain a bunch of
separate scripts.  I use PAX and TEAM, both posted to
comp.sources.whatever and available from the major archives, plus
COMPRESS, and I get good results.  (No I can't mail it so don't ask - it
was done for my firm.)  The point is, it ain't hard.

 3. The advantages of cpio(1) over tar(1) go away when you have TEAM
in the pipeline.  The tape streams and screams just fine.
-- 
Annex Canada now!  We need the room,	\)	Tom Neff
    and who's going to stop us.		(\	tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET