>>It deeply disturbs me that customers are trying to get IBM to corrupt
the
purpose of the Archive operation so that it will do what customers can
do
now with Selective Backup.

I don't want to corrupt anything.  What I want to do is save an entire
system for a specified period of time.  We can do it with backup, but we
chose archive because of ADSM's habit of rebinding.  As I wrote in my
original  post, our ultimate solution was to create another node for the
long-term backup.

As for Selective backup, it too is very inconvenient because you CANNOT
save an entire system easily... you must specify each filesystem.
Selective bacup does not default to "all-local" as incremental does.

The symbolic link problem can be very simply solved... as was expessed
by another reader, just give us the option to follow or not to follow
links.  That is all we need!

>>This is a bad thing to try to do.
Please... Lean on them to improve the flexibility of Backup.

Ok. IBM, please improve Backup!  And Restore (why can't I restore all
filesystems with a single command?)

Robin Sharpe
Bloomingdale, NJ


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com