Subject: Re: design problem with restore(8)?
To: Luke Mewburn <email@example.com>
From: David Brownlee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
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.
.---- 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 --'