Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!mentor.cc.purdue.edu!mace.cc.purdue.edu!du4
From: du4@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Ted Goldstein)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: HELP! Used RECOVER instead of RESTORE
Keywords: Is there any hope?
Message-ID: <1607@mace.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 2 Feb 89 21:43:50 GMT
References: <9077@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM>
Reply-To: du4@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Ted Goldstein)
Distribution: na
Organization: Purdue University
Lines: 14

In article <9077@burdvax.PRC.Unisys.COM> bmiller@PRC.Unisys.COM (Bruce J. Miller) writes:
>he was told had been created by using BACKUP.  Instead of using RESTORE, 
>he used RECOVER.  The result was a disk with a directory full of files
>named "FILExxxx.RES" where xxxx are sequential numbers up to the number of
>(Please don't say "DUMMY!" - we already did that).  We are using MS-DOS 3.3;
>some tools (Norton) are available.
>		Bruce Miller (burdvax.prc.unisys.com)

The "disk troubleshooter " book that comes with the new version of Norton 
utilities contains a detailed explanation of how to recreate your file
structure after using the dos recover comand.

du4@mace.cc.purdue.edu
Ted Goldstein