Nate Williams bdc95502ca Fix possible FS corruption caused by extra parameter to pax. ... oo Turns out, it's pretty important if you use PAX for backup. In the man page for PAX, there is an error (OK, we could call it a "potentially catastrophic incompleteness"). It reads: > The command: > > pax -r -v -f filename > > gives the verbose table of contents for an archive stored in filename. Yup, it does do that. With a side effect: it also _replaces_ all the files that come in from the archive. As is my custom, I did my backup-validation real soon after the backup was written. Precisely because I've seen the same sort of thing happen on other systems. So all that file-restoring didn't do a lot of damage. Probably helped my fragmentation somewhat (aha, an online defragger?) It did confuse one hapless user, who lost an email message he _knew_ he hadn't deleted. Apparently the system restored the file as of just before that critical message came in. The correct entry should read: > The command: > > pax -v -f filename > > gives the verbose table of contents for an archive stored in filename. Submitted by: John Beckett <jbeckett@southern.edu> via the BSDI mailing list		1995-08-16 23:12:25 +00:00
..
cat
chflags
chmod
cp
csh
date
dd
df
domainname
echo
ed
expr
hostname
kill
ln
ls
mkdir
mv
pax	Fix possible FS corruption caused by extra parameter to pax.	1995-08-16 23:12:25 +00:00
ps
pwd
rcp
rm
rmail
rmdir
sh
sleep
stty
sync
test
Makefile
Makefile.inc