From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751979AbXDIRMH (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2007 13:12:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752051AbXDIRMG (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2007 13:12:06 -0400 Received: from Mycroft.westnet.com ([216.187.52.7]:61800 "EHLO Mycroft.westnet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751979AbXDIRME (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2007 13:12:04 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17946.29660.368403.553290@smtp.charter.net> Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 13:11:56 -0400 From: "John Stoffel" To: Gene Heskett Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: I give up In-Reply-To: <200704091137.01336.gene.heskett@gmail.com> References: <200704091007.58535.gene.heskett@gmail.com> <461A5204.1050206@garzik.org> <200704091137.01336.gene.heskett@gmail.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.4.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>>>> "Gene" == Gene Heskett writes: Gene> On Monday 09 April 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> Gene Heskett wrote: >>> Now the 64k$ question: While running with LVM2 managed disks, is it >>> possible to run without dm_mod, the device-mapper? If so, please tell >>> me how to achieve this. >> >> No; device mapper is the kernel portion of LVM2. >> >> Jeff, who actively avoids LVM on home computers Gene> Ya shoulda warned me. :-) Gene> It should have lots bigger warning labels, in bright red Gene> self-illuminating signs, than it does. It in fact seems to work Gene> well, but it is a major breakage for some common apps, like Gene> doing backups... >>From the GNU info doc on the tar program: Metadata stored in snapshot files include device numbers, which, obviously is supposed to be a non-volatile value. However, it turns out that NFS devices have undependable values when an automounter gets in the picture. This can lead to a great deal of spurious redumping in incremental dumps, so it is somewhat useless to compare two NFS devices numbers over time. The solution implemented currently is to considers all NFS devices as being equal when it comes to comparing directories; this is fairly gross, but there does not seem to be a better way to go. This to me, seems to be another borkage of the tar program. Can you tell Amanda to use 'dump/restore' instead of tar instead? Or heck, just move to Bacula, it's smarter than amanda/tar and it supports writing to DVDs, etc. http://www.bacula.org This tar borkness is pretty annoying, since Amanda (from the docs page) only keeps indexes in terms of host/filesystem/path/date, nothing about the major/minor (device) numbers. It just re-inforces my desire to never use Amanda again. John john@stoffel.org