plea for tar-1.21

[Gene Heskett]

On Tuesday 14 April 2009, John W. Linville wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 02:58:31PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Thursday 09 April 2009, John W. Linville wrote:
>> >On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 01:14:42PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> >> Please, either stabilize the device mapping (BTW, how did you do that
>> >> when I didn't even reboot?) or give us a version of tar that can cope
>> >> with it. According to the ChangeLog, it will take 1.21 to do that.
>> >
>> >Gene,
>> >
>> >Did you open a bug at bugzilla.redhat.com for this update?
>> >
>> >tar-1.22 is in F-11.  It should be no problem to get a version in F-10.
>> >I'll be happy to do it, presuming that the package owner grants me
>> >sufficient privilege to do so.
>> >
>> >John
>>
>> I may have been premature with this squawk John, both Dustin and I
>> miss-read the tar ChangeLog, and that option IS in 1.20 unless fedora
>> removed it when they built it for the rpm in the repos.  Can anyone answer
>> that detail please?
>
>AFAICT it is there.
>
>Hth...?
>
>John

Maybe John, & maybe not.  The next time fedora/udev, or the kernel, decides to 
re-enumerate the disks in this system is when I can say for sure.  If it goes 
by without driving tar out of its mind when instructed to check level 1, 2, 3 
or even 4 for backup levels, that will be good.  However, I just recently had 
a situation where all 4 of the levels it normally checks the estimates of when 
planning this backup session, were all reported to be the same size as a level 
0.  There is no way in tuncket that 95GB of data is gonna fit on a 20GB tape & 
the only thing I can do is fire off a script that runs as many as 8 backups in 
a row each time I run it, just to get caught back up.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Whether you can hear it or not,
The Universe is laughing behind your back.
		-- National Lampoon, "Deteriorata"