> I had a file which was marked inactive on the server, because it was
> deleted at my workstation. So I restored it. After succesfull completion
> I expected it to be active again, but it was still inactive.
> At a new incremental backup it was backed up again, so I had two
> identical versions on the server, one active and one inactive.
> That is a lot of work for nearly nothing and twice as much disk space
> for the file on the server as was necessary.
> In my opinion the server should just change the status from 'inactive'
> into 'active' after succesfull completion of the restore.

This one's a judgement call, I think. Technically, ADSM is being
consistent in that the restored file becomes the active version
at the next backup and the previous file becomes the first
inactive copy, treating the case as if it were any other change
to the file. I'd prefer the model to remain consistent.