Hmm... Well, in looking at one client that has a /2 file system with one
very large directory under it (approx 326 GB), but no other directories
or files at that level, I see that my most recent full for this saveset
was only 2 KB. My directive looks like this:
<< /2 >>
skip: .?* *
It would appear that this works and prevents NetWorker from backing up
anything deeper. There are no .nsr files under /2. Maybe the fact that I
don't have more files or directories other than the one is making this
occur?
George
Andrew McGeorge wrote:
>
> George,
>
> I read it this way (I may be wrong):
>
> In the first case you would skip every file in /home, but still backup all
> the directories and their contents below.
>
> In the second case you would skip everything including all subdirectories
> and their contents.
>
> In the third case you would only skip the subdirectory "jack" within /home
> and any subdirectory "jack" in levels below that.
>
> regards
> Andrew McGeorge
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Sinclair [mailto:George.Sinclair AT NOAA DOT GOV]
> Sent: 1 April 2003 11:19:AM
> To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
> Subject: [Networker] Very basic directive question under Unix?
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a rather basic question concerning the use of +skip versus skip
> under Unix. Let's suppose you want to skip the entire /home file system.
> If you're directive looks like this:
>
> << /home >>
> skip .?* *
>
> versus say:
>
> << /home >>
> +skip .?* *
>
> Then in this case, since you're skipping the whole enchilada, don't they
> both accomplish the same thing? On the other hand, if I wanted to
> capture the whole file system, but I wanted to exclude every occurrence
> of say jack, and only jack, then wouldn't I *HAVE* to have:
>
> << /home >>
> +skip: jack
>
> It's just always been my understanding that the '+' is only really
> necessary when you're telling NetWorker to recursively skip specific
> path names under the path named inside the angle brackets, but not if
> you're skipping the whole path named inside the angle brackets. Maybe
> this is true only under Unix and not Windows or NT?
>
> Any help on clearing up this issue would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> George
>
> --
> Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
> to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
> http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
> also view and post messages to the list.
> =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
>
> ========================================================================================
> This email message and attachments are confidential to our organisation and
> subject to legal privilege. If you have received this email in error, please
> advise the sender immediately and destroy the message and any attachments. If
> you are not the intended recipient you are notified that any use,
> distribution, amendment, copying or any action taken or omitted to be taken
> in reliance of this message or attachments is prohibited. You can read our
> Privacy Policy here: <http://www.asbbank.co.nz/privacystatement.stm>
> =========================================================================================
--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
|
