On March 14, you wrote:
> I would recommend using dump/restore instead of tar. Dump should be quicker
> for one thing, since it bypasses the filesystem when dumping.
> You also can be sure that you will only get the filesystem you want,
> since dump never works across several filesystems, which tar does.
> Finally, dump preserve inode numbers, so that hard links are
> preserved as well. tar don't handle that.

  Good point about dump.  The only problem I have with it is, as far
as I'm aware, it can only work on a filesystem-by-filesystem basis,
not for just one directory hierarchy within a filesystem.  Not an
issue for this application, of course...

> Actually, the example seems a little wrong. For one thing, I would assume
> that it's ra1 that should mounted and unmounted. And I must admit, I'm a

  YES yes yes...Sorry 'bout that...assume ra1 in my example...brain fart.

> little surprised the above example even works, since tar should have
> added the files under /mnt while copying from /...
> This might lead to a recursive copy. :-)

  That's why I use "tar -clf" in there...the "l" says "don't cross
filesystem boundaries"...it gets rid of that nasty little recursion
problem.  I use it frequently.

> Also, this should end up copying /usr onto /dev/ra1a, under /mnt/usr.
> While this isn't an error per se, it does use up some disk, which will
> be invisible once you mount another filesystem under that usr-dir.

  As above, not with "-l" on the source tar command line...Now that I
think of it, is that only a GNUtar-ism?


                        -Dave McGuire
                         mcguire@digex.net