Amanda-Users

Re: Strange amverify behaviour with amanda 2.4.5

2006-03-12 06:53:40
Subject: Re: Strange amverify behaviour with amanda 2.4.5
From: Tony van der Hoff <lists AT nospam.vanderhoff DOT org>
To: amanda-users AT amanda DOT org
Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 10:49:16 +0000
Jon LaBadie <jon AT jgcomp DOT com> wrote in message
<20060305132746.GA20204 AT butch.jgcomp DOT com>

> On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 01:11:35PM +0000, Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> > Jon LaBadie <jon AT jgcomp DOT com> wrote in message
> > 
> > > > I did a dump to the holding disk, without a tape mounted, to get the
> > > > image. I then stripped of the first 32k bytes to lose the tape
> > > > header, and tried to untar the rest. That gave a corrupt file error
> > > > in the failing image, but a valid output on non-failing images. I
> > > > conclude that it is the dump that's going wrong before it gets to
> > > > the taper.
> > > 
> > > Seems reasonable.  Did you also use the "z" option (if appropriate)
> > > when untar'ing?  What did the file cmd say about the archive file
> > > after stripping?
> > > 
> > The archive wasn't compressed. Don't understand what you mean by the
> > file cmd, sorry.
> 
> A command named "file".
> 
Posix tar archive.

Anyway, just to close this for the archives, if nothing else, I was forced
to abandon my research on this matter due to other priorities.

However, by specifying all DLEs with compression, I get a clean dump, with a
good amverify. You'll recall that the failing archive was uncompressed. 

This'll do for me, until I get some more time to investigate. I remain
convinced that there is a bug (maybe amanda; possibly in GNU/tar) causing
this problem. My guess is that not many people use uncompressed GNU/tar
archives...

Thanks again, everyone on the list, for your help.
-- 
Tony van der Hoff          | mailto:tony AT vanderhoff DOT org
Buckinghamshire, England

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>