> Does it make any sense to back up hard links?

As opposed to what?  Not backing them up?

> My testing shows that they 
> are not recovered as hard links so seems pointless to do so?

Did you try recovering them both in the same session?

> You'd have 
> your pathnames back, but they would just be copies taking up space, not 
> actual hard links. You'd have to re-create the hard links from
> scratch. 

I don't think that's correct.  There have been some bugs associated with
it in the past, but hard links should be recovered properly.

I would not expect that you could recover one link to a file and have it
relink to a file already present.  I would expect that if you recovered
multiple links to a file that each would be a link to the same file.


-- 
Darren Dunham                                           ddunham AT taos DOT com
Senior Technical Consultant         TAOS            http://www.taos.com/
Got some Dr Pepper?                           San Francisco, CA bay area
         < This line left intentionally blank to confuse you. >

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the
body of the email. Please write to networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu 
if you have any problems
wit this list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER