From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: dexen deVries <dexen.devries@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 18:23:27 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36-14+; KDE/4.5.1; i686; ; )
References: <AANLkTikADzND+BfcvvB+3pp=riByswcOOeeCQ_+OQZtE@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=DOUSD+hWOOA069wkkEEKapOrzbTeLA9jDh7uF@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=DOUSD+hWOOA069wkkEEKapOrzbTeLA9jDh7uF@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201011171823.27527.dexen.devries@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Anyone using p9p or Plan 9 venti as a more generic
	backup system?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 842496be-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Wednesday 17 November 2010 18:14:35 Venkatesh Srinivas wrote:
> (...)
> I'd be very careful with vac -m and -a on Unix; both have been at the
> root of considerable data-loss on a unix venti for me. I'd recommend
> vac-ing tarballs, rather than using vac's on unix trees directly. But
> your mileage may vary...


could you please elaborate a bit about that data loss?
traversing symlinks breaks? some files not getting read by vac at all?

(I'm interested in using p9p vac+venti in similar manner, but on Linux w/ GNU
stuff)

--
dexen deVries


``One can't proceed from the informal to the formal by formal means.''