[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: tranferring of bakup from linux to windows

On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Ian Firla wrote:

> > Pete Peterson <petersonp genrad com> writes:
> >
> > > I don't believe it's a good idea to just copy the files/directories to
> > > the windoze machine using an smbmounted directory.  If you do this, you
> > > lose all the ownership/permission information and also don't preserve
> > > things like symlinks and hard links.  It's fine to use tar, cpio etc.
> > > to *MAKE* the archive and then copy *THAT* to the windoze machine through
> > > ftp, the smbmounted directory or any other means.
> >
> > Agreed. That's what I do here - make several tar.bz2 archives
> > (/etc,/usr/local,/var,/home) and put them into an smbmounted
> > directory.
> Why several? You're misleading here. The whole point of tar is to create
> archives which you can also compress. The compression method you choose is
> up to you: gz, bz2, etc but the point is that you can archive entire
> directory trees recursively. Why on earth would you break them up? Unless
> you were reaching your file system's theoretical file size limits.

why are you so opposed to having more than one archive?  that makes
perfect sense.  if only one of your directories/filesystems goes bad,
you need only copy/restore one of the archive files.  methinks you
doth protest way too much about what seems to be a thoroughly
reasonable approach.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]