On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 08:44:39PM +0000, Gavin Henry wrote:
> On Saturday 06 Nov 2004 17:35, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> >
> > So the correct answer, whether you like it or not, is "a new tape"
> > labelled, but unused previously.  So, amcheck saying "new tape"
> > is correct, because you have not yet written to your entire
> > tape cycle.  It will expect, and use, a new tape with any label
> > in the drive the next time an amdump is run.  
> 
> As long as it matches the labelstr.

I looked over my answer and thought ... should I add that.
But you are correct.

> > If you had tape2 
> > in the drive, it would have reported it was a appropriate tape.
> 
> Yes.

And I probably should have said "I think it would say a new tape was
needed, and that tape2 was ok".  But I wasn't certain, so I did not..
> 
> > Thus it is just saying this is the next tape listed 
> > in the tapelist file.  But it is incorrect because you could
> > stick in tape 12 at this time and amcheck and amdump would be
> > happy.  
> 
> Because it matches labelstr, but should they mind? If you number them. But 
> saying that, does the regex require a number in it? If so, it should ask for 
> the next tape in that number sequence.

No, nothing about the labeling has any concept of "sequence" with the
exception of the date ordering of usage of tapes in the tapelist.

With a suitable labelstr you could leave off the word "tape" and
name them 1, 2, ... 13 or with other suitable labelstr you could
use one, two, ... thirteen, or presidents names or your children
or famous ducks like Huey, Dewey, and Louis.
> 
> Ok. I will explain this to the client, but I still don't understand this as 
> different server installs report what tape is next with amcheck after running 
> one backup, but this one does not.

I don't recall this coming up before so I don't have an answer.
> 
> What about a backup not to tape, i.e in the holding disk? I think i did 
> backup 
> one was done like this. Whould this effect amcheck?
>
Not certain what you are asking here.

-- 
Jon H. LaBadie                  jon AT jgcomp DOT com
 JG Computing
 4455 Province Line Road        (609) 252-0159
 Princeton, NJ  08540-4322      (609) 683-7220 (fax)