MIchael Leone wrote:

>> In this case the OP said that he was planning to relabel recyclable
>> tapes into the same pool, which to me seems to be like a broken pencil -
>> pointless.
> 
> heh
> 
> I mentioned that to my boss (about NW automatically relabeling tapes as 
> needed), and he said "That is what's theoretically supposed to happen. 
> However, if we relabel ourselves (on tapes 2 months old or older), then we 
> know that it has happened, and not be caught, if NW doesn't do it the way 
> we expect ...".
> 
> So in my case, the point is ... beacuse my boss wants me to do it that 
> way. So I do ...

The boss is always right.

In this case though, the automatic relabelling of tapes is very mature
functionality, and just works. There are reasons why it could fail, such
as the tapes not being inventoried, but this could equally happen after
manually relabelling. I suppose someone might have accidentally write
protected the tape, which would cause the relabel to fail, that happens
sometimes with us but there are usually enough other tapes available.

I wouldn't argue if the boss says this should be done. My boss just told
me to upgrade to 7.3.x from the nice stable 7.2.1 that we have run for a
couple of years. He knows best too I expect.  ;-)

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 with 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