why not keep going?

Ben Escoto bescoto@stanford.edu
Fri, 17 May 2002 11:30:58 -0700

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

>>>>> "RW" == Robert Weber <Robert.Weber@colorado.edu>
>>>>> wrote the following on Fri, 17 May 2002 10:57:30 -0600

  RW> I am using V 0.6.1.  I am setting up a large scale backup and
  RW> I'd like to use rdiff backup.  I have noticed that if the rdiff
  RW> fails for some reason(the file contents change while it is
  RW> running) it kills the ENTIRE backup.  I've got an active
  RW> filesystem and I keep getting
  RW> and it kills the backup.  Why not either

  RW> a) copy files to /tmp before doing the sig

  RW> b) move on to the next file?

  RW> Also, you have code to identify some special files, but
  RW> apparently not "door" files.  these should not be dumped, and
  RW> becuase of above, it prevents / backups on some systems(door
  RW> files go in /etc on solaris).

  RW> (animas)[10:56am]:~ > ls -l /var/run/syslog_door Drw-r--r-- 1
  RW> root root 0 Apr 17 18:19

  RW> If you could identify them that would be great, however if b)
  RW> from above was implemented then it wouldn't be an issue.

I am trying to fix these issues for the next version, and do b) in the
cases you mention.  My thought before was to check for various
specific errors (as in various kinds of IOError), keep going if the
error was recognized as one it made sense to keep going from, and
abort otherwise.

    But it seems hard to recognize all these errors, which may
different from system to system, so now I think it makes more sense to
do it the opposite way, and keep going unless an error is recognized
as one we should stop because of.

Ben Escoto

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 01/15/2001