Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!fluke!moriarty
From: moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: After the stack: Some questions about Retrospect
Message-ID: <7913@fluke.COM>
Date: 25 Apr 89 18:23:28 GMT
References: <7901@fluke.COM> <29471@apple.Apple.COM>
Sender: news@tc.fluke.COM
Reply-To: moriarty@tc.fluke.COM (Jeff Meyer)
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Lines: 47

In article <29471@apple.Apple.COM> chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) writes:
>>Is there some way to either
>>preserve the structure or indicate the pathname the file was in when it was
>>archived? 
>
>Directory structure is maintained for nested folders based on the root of
>the volume (or subvolume) so if you have a directory foo:bar:baz:file,
>the archive will reflect (and optionally regenerate) the directory structure
>when you restore.

Excellent -- and I assume that this directory structure is listed when
you're browsing through a Retrospect archive?

>>2)  DELETION/REPLACEMENT.  Is there some way to delete a single file off the
>>archived list?
>
>No. I asked about that, too. It's primarily a limitation of the media --
>tapes and WORMS and stuch don't allow that. Dantz has said they'll look into
>supporting it for media that does support it sometime in the future (i.e.
>not in the initial release, maybe not ever). 

Probably not a biggie -- every once in a while I could dump the entire
archive to disk, get rid of the duplicates, and then archive it back to
tape.

One last question: can multiple Retrospect archives be placed on a single
tape (in particular, a 40MB cartridge tape?)  In other words, after you've
archived one group of files to a tape, can you create another, seperate
archive on the same tape (if there's room) and begin archiving files to it?
If you can, then I'm sold; I suspect that a Retrospect archive == a file, so
this is probably possible.

OK, *one* more question, Chuq: how does the file compression option stand
up?  Does it slow down the archiving process much, compared to
non-compressed mode?  How does the % compressed stand up, compared to (say)
StuffIt?  [If you're under non-disclosure oath about stuff like this, forget
I asked, and thanks for the info so far...]

                           "We Americans, we're a simple people... but piss us
                            off, and we'll bomb your cities."
                                           -- Robin Williams
---
                                        Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
INTERNET:     moriarty@tc.fluke.COM
Manual UUCP:  {uw-beaver, sun, hplsla, thebes, microsoft}!fluke!moriarty
CREDO:        You gotta be Cruel to be Kind...
<*> DISCLAIMER: Do what you want with me, but leave my employers alone! <*>