Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!sri-spam!nike!lll-crg!lll-lcc!pyramid!decwrl!sun!guy
From: guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Seeking a Development Environment (Sun?)
Message-ID: <8501@sun.uucp>
Date: Fri, 24-Oct-86 14:25:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.8501
Posted: Fri Oct 24 14:25:10 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 26-Oct-86 01:50:09 EDT
References: <4254@brl-smoke.ARPA> <935@kbsvax.steinmetz.UUCP> <8422@sun.uucp> <41862@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 20

> (Yes, I think system 5 backup procedures are brain dead. Guess what
> else we're not considering buying because the system administration is
> "different". Try doing 10 gigabytes of disk with cpio and volcopy. Then
> try it with "dump".)

What's especially obnoxious about this is that there *does* exist a dump
program that works much like the 4.2 "dump" and that can be made to work on
S5 - namely, the 4.1 "dump".  The main thing you'd have to do is teach it to
support both 512-byte and 1024-byte file systems.  To get something like the
4.2 "restore", you could start with the 4.1 "restor" (it's better than the
S3 one, because it maintains the "s_tfree" and "s_tinode" fields, which the
S3 one does not), possibly fold some S3isms into it (I did this a long time
ago, and I don't remember what you have to do any more), and then fold all
the nice "restore by name", "restore a directory subtree", etc. features
from the 4.2 "restore" into it.  Anybody at AT&T-IS willing to torque off
their management by doing this?
-- 
	Guy Harris
	{ihnp4, decvax, seismo, decwrl, ...}!sun!guy
	guy@sun.com (or guy@sun.arpa)