belrick AT HOME DOT COM wrote:
#A symbolic link allows you to access/call/reference one and only one copy of a
#piece of data by two or more names.  The fact is, there is only one instance of
#that data.  Changing one changes all.  In your scheme, the retrieved data
breaks
#this link, creating two or three versions of the piece of data which are now
#independent.  That is hardly what I would call preserving the data properly.

Me neither. Maybe archive should carry a warning that "this command is only
to be used for the long term storage of DATA, and not for the wholesale storage
of
systems"?

The opinion here is that Bill Colwells 'point-in-time' concept is probably what
(most of us?) require of the system. Furthermore, am I the only one to which
users
say "can you store the system backup you took last night until I tell you
otherwise?"
(I realise that the correct response to this is 'NO!')? In which case, being
able to
'nominate' a backup as a point in time would be really handy to have, although
by no means essential.

If we get 'point in time' (please IBM!) perhaps it would be wisest for the
genii at the ADSM
development labs to 'break' archive - that is so it just ignores links - in my
opinion preferable to the state of affairs that we have now.

Bob Cross (and yes, I do know what a symlink is!)

--Boundary_(ID_C1MiCf4kfUN84vy++kVFUg)--
=========================================================================