Re: includes and incremental backups

Joerg,

Thank you for the information.  I'm using Microsoft Outlook which altered
some of my text and I accidentally replaced the 0 with o, so I am doing a
level 0 backup first.  I will go ahead and install the latest version from
the path you gave me and see how that works.  Thanks for your help!

-Jacob

-----Original Message-----
From: Joerg Schilling [mailto:[email protected]] =

Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 1:53 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Star-users] includes and incremental backups

"Jacob Shucart" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm trying to do full and incremental backups using star(version 1.5a75
for
> the Lustre filesystem) and it does not seem to be doing them.  The command
> that is being used for the full backup is is:

Why do you use a 3 year old version although star-1.5-final was published a =

year ago?

> /usr/bin/star -c -f - -C /lustretest fs-name=3D/lustretest -xdev -link-di=
rs
\ =

>
>   -level=3Do -wtardumps tardumps=3D/etc/tardumps -xattr -acl H=3Dexustar \
>
>   "errctl=3DWARN|SAMEFILE|DIFF|GROW|SHRINK|SPECIALFILE|GETXATTR|BADACL *"=
 \ =

>
>   -sparse -dodesc list=3D/tmp/test/lustretest.include

There is no level "o".

> And for the incremental backup:
>
>  =

>
> /usr/bin/star -c -f - -C /lustretest fs-name=3D/lustretest -xdev -link-di=
rs
\ =

>
>   -level=3D1 -wtardumps tardumps=3D/etc/tardumps -xattr -acl H=3Dexustar \
>
>   "errctl=3DWARN|SAMEFILE|DIFF|GROW|SHRINK|SPECIALFILE|GETXATTR|BADACL *"=
 \ =

>
>   -sparse -dodesc list=3D/tmp/test/lustretest.include
>
>  =

>
> I should mention that /tmp/test/lustretest.include is a text file that
> contains:
>
> ./jacob

If this is a directory and in case that never ever a file is renamed from =

outside the tree in "jacob" to a path that is inside "jacob", this may =

theoretically work.


> In both cases, star updates the timestamp on /etc/tardumps, but it doesn't
> add anything to it and both of the backups are identical.  Is this a
> limitation of star when it is using the include list?  Or is this a bug
that
> is fixed in a newer version of star?  If it is fixed in a newer version,
> does the newer version also have support for the Lustre filesystem?
Please
> let me know.  Thank you.

It may be that you are a victim of a filesystem implementation bug on your
OS
and that your filesystem does not support sufficiently POSIX compliant time =

stamps.

It may be that your problem is that you do not use the official syntax for =

incremental backups that is documented in the man page.....

A a full or incremental dump is done via

star -c -M level=3Dsomething -C some-dir .

BTW: this syntax is enforced by star in case that the dumplevel is >=3D 0.


P.S.: As there recently have been some minor bug-fixes, I recommend not to
use =

star-1.5 but the fixed star-1.5 version from =


ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily/ =


the Schily Source consolidation.

J=F6rg

-- =

 EMail:[email protected] (home) J=F6rg Schilling D-13353
Berlin
       [email protected]                (uni)  =

       [email protected] (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily