Subject: Re: design problem with restore(8)?
To: Luke Mewburn <>
From: David Brownlee <>
List: current-users
Date: 06/17/1996 12:31:05
On Mon, 17 Jun 1996, Luke Mewburn wrote:

> My proposal is (which I'll send-pr unless I get a good case against):
> 	- all operations except 'r' and 'R' use a temporary
> 	  per-process filename, (i.e, operations which aren't intended
> 	  to be restarted)
> 	- 'r' and 'R' only use the dumpdate as the temporary filename
> 	  (so they can be restarted and pick up the correct bit)
> 	- document the above.
> This doesn't break current things and fixes up 99% of cases where
> sharing the tempname causes problems.
	Sounds good to me.
	When -R/-r are given you might want to spit out a messages to
	stderr warning the user	about running concurrent restores.

                   David/abs             (

.---- I've been too drunk to love ----.--- I've been too drunk to remember -.
|          Too drunk to care          |     The hell of the night before    |
|  Looked like death, felt like Hell  |    I've been drinking myself blind  |
`------ Been the worse for wear ------'--- And still I'll drink some more --'