Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!seismo!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!isl1.ri.cmu.edu!cycy
From: cycy@isl1.ri.cmu.edu (Christopher Young)
Newsgroups: net.unix,net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Question about cpio vs. tar
Message-ID: <268@isl1.ri.cmu.edu>
Date: Thu, 8-May-86 03:21:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: isl1.268
Posted: Thu May  8 03:21:57 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 11-May-86 02:22:46 EDT
References: <236@oucs.UUCP> <468@ncr-sd.UUCP>, <355@imagen.UUCP>
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 15
Xref: linus net.unix:7156 net.unix-wizards:14997

> In article <236@oucs.UUCP> tim@oucs.UUCP (Tim Thompson) writes:
> >I've been reading the discussion about the shortcomings of multiple tape
> >backups in cpio format. Does tar handle multiple tapes better?
> 
> Last I looked, tar didn't handle multiple reels at all.
> -- 
When did you look last? I've used multiple tar with multiple tapes
plenty of times. I haven't had any problems.

If I were doing backups of the system, however, I'd be more inclined to
use dump and restore.

I can't say I'm terribly fond of cpio, however when using streaming tape
on a 3b2, tar does weird things so that it takes much longer than cpio.
Cpio works better in that case.