>Richard Unger a ecrit:
>
>On Wed, 2002-01-02 at 11:38, Don Yuniskis wrote:
>> > Donald Lee wrote:
>> 
>> >If you want to restore a drive, I would suggest that you consider
>> >using dump/restore rather than tar.  tar has some quirks, like
>> 
>> That wouldn't allow him to "drop in" a base.tgz in place
>> of the standard base.tgz and use the installer "out of the box"...
>
>exactly. any other solution would require a bootable NetBSD partition to
>'bring the system up'. With this solution you could probably make a
>bootable MacOS CD that restores your system.

So, when is the "MacOS partition" requirement going to go away?
Is anyone working on that?  Is it a problem of lack of information?
Or, just lack of resources (man hours)?

>> >device files, empty directories, and permissions that make it
>> >not a good match for "imaging".  dump/restore, although balky,
>> >are built specifically for this task.
>> 
>> Huh??  What am I missing?  I use tar all the time to build
>> my backups...
>
>I stand corrected.

<whew>  I was starting to get nervous thinking my tape backups
were, perhaps, not *really* going to work "when needed"...

>As you said, tar is not always tar, and I have to

And then there's cpio... :-/

>admit I just was not sure if the options were available to keep the
>attributes of the device files. I work mainly on linux now for my day to
>day stuff, and only run machines that have to be reliable on NetBSD
>;)...

I think the "express" way to *clone* a system is probably dd(1).
But, I'm not sure how well it would work on *active* filesystems
(since it's actions would not be atomic).

--don