Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!mcdchg!chinet!les
From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: GNU-tar vs dump(1)
Message-ID: <7408@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 8 Jan 89 06:25:18 GMT
References: <18008@adm.BRL.MIL> <4601@xenna.Encore.COM>
Reply-To: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Organization: Chinet - Public Access Unix
Lines: 16

In article <4601@xenna.Encore.COM> bzs@Encore.COM (Barry Shein) writes:
>
>Another limitation of using tar (which, again, I don't know if gnutar
>attacked) is restoring device entries. This isn't always a problem
>since you usually got a working /dev/ from somewhere to start the
>restore but if there are other device entries which are normally
>dumped/restored this could be a consideration.

GNU tar knows how to mknod() device and FIFO entries (haven't tried it
but the code is there).  It can also save a special entry containing
all of the directory entries at the time of an incremental and remove
anything that isn't supposed to be there when it is restored. Also, it
can be told to stay within a filesystem. It looks like the only thing missing
is the ability to reset the ctime of restored files.  

Les Mikesell