1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 16 Jun 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 334       Contents:- Re: Another (simpler) DCL enhancement request ! Re: backup Encryption PAK/Product  Re: Backup question 3 Re: Intel neuters Montvale, Itanic screams in alarm   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:43:24 +0100 0 From: Chris Sharman <chris.sharman@sorry.nospam>6 Subject: Re: Another (simpler) DCL enhancement request4 Message-ID: <d8re3c$jte$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>   Charlie Hammond wrote:. > The original [problem/feature] is confirmed. > Specifically:  >     H >     DIFFERENCES /IGNORE=COMMENT sees a "!" in a .COM file (or any fileJ >     if /COMMENT=EXCLAIMATION is used) as a comment delimiter even if it 7 >     is part of an F$FAO directive in a quoted string.  > G > I have made a formal query about this and will report what I am told. M > Frankly, my expectations for getting this fixed are not high, but sometimes K > I get suprised.  If I don't post the responce within a week or so, please  > remind me and I'll follow up.    Thanks. ? Meantime, I guess the best workaround is to avoid /ign=comment. I It would be odd for someone to change the comments and nothing else in a  F piece of code, anyway, unless the original was inadequately clear and 
 needed it.   Chris    ------------------------------    Date: 15 Jun 2005 23:20:13 -07001 From: "Bart.Zorn@xs4all.nl" <Bart.Zorn@xs4all.nl> * Subject: Re: backup Encryption PAK/ProductB Message-ID: <1118902813.755449.86930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>  ? Here in Belgium we use ENCRYPT V1.6 on OpenVMS V7.3-2 without a  separate license pak.   ( Btw, AMDS was never separately licensed!  	 Bart Zorn    ------------------------------    Date: 16 Jun 2005 10:10:30 -0700$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Backup questionC Message-ID: <1118941830.129843.298400@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Syltrem wrote:= > "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> a =E9crit dans le message de ? > news:1118881760.825472.191980@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...  >  >  > Syltrem wrote:K > > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> a =E9crit dans le message de * > > news:42B056AC.369EA59B@teksavvy.com... > > > Syltrem wrote: > > > > So the solution with% > > > > $ DATE =3D F$CVT(,"ABSOLUTE") ? > > > > $ BACKUP/SINCE=3DBACKUP/MODIFIED/RECORD to the 1st tape L > > > > $ BACKUP/SINCE=3D&date/BACKUP to the 2nd tape (I mean, to the other=  VMS > > node > [...] L > > $! ---- and we can validate that the 2nd backup command will again back= up! > > the same files as the 1st one < > > $ direr/dat=3D(mod,back) $1$DKC500:[*...]/notrail/nohead > > $1$DKC500:[DIR1]FILE1.DAT;1 I > >                      15-JUN-2005 13:27:52.62  15-JUN-2005 13:29:02.36  > > $1$DKC500:[DIR1]FILE2.DAT;1 I > >                      15-JUN-2005 13:30:53.12  15-JUN-2005 13:32:42.28  > > $1$DKC500:[DIR2]FILE3.DAT;1 I > >                      15-JUN-2005 13:28:03.38  15-JUN-2005 13:29:02.36  > > $1$DKC500:[DIR2]FILE4.DAT;1 I > >                      15-JUN-2005 13:28:06.32  15-JUN-2005 13:29:02.36  > > $1$DKC500:[DIR2]FILE5.DAT;1 I > >                      15-JUN-2005 13:29:39.21  15-JUN-2005 13:32:42.28  > > $ L > > $ BACKUP/SINCE=3D"15-JUN-2005 13:32:42.28"/BACKUP $1$DKC500:[000000...]= /log
 > > nl:a.b
 > > ck/sav; > > %BACKUP-S-COPIED, copied $1$DKC500:[000000]000000.DIR;1 9 > > %BACKUP-S-COPIED, copied $1$DKC500:[000000]DIR1.DIR;1 8 > > %BACKUP-S-COPIED, copied $1$DKC500:[DIR1]FILE2.DAT;19 > > %BACKUP-S-COPIED, copied $1$DKC500:[000000]DIR2.DIR;1 8 > > %BACKUP-S-COPIED, copied $1$DKC500:[DIR2]FILE5.DAT;1 > > $  > > $! --- and it does > E > >> But what happens if some files are renamed, modified, or deleted K > >> between the start of the first backup and the start of the second? You K > >> won't get the same files in each save set, in general. And what if one ) > >> or more directory files are renamed?  > L > A deleted file will not be on the 2nd tape. That`s ok since it`s not meant% > to be recovered with a /INCREMENTAL    Agreed.   L > A modified file (really modified - not a new version) will be backed up by6 > the 2nd backup since its backup date is not changed.   Agreed.   L > A new file will not be backed up, so that`s consistent with the 1st backup/ > Same for directory files as far as I can tell    Agreed.    > H > A renamed file or directory will be backed up by the 2nd backup and be) > restored appropriately by /INCREMENTAL.     B OK, here's a problem. Renaming a file clears its backup date. This5 means that the following scenario would be a problem:    1=2E /image/record to tape1  2=2E /image to tape2 3=2E User creates a.a K 4=2E /since=3Dbackup/record to tape1 -- this saves a.a and records a backup  date< 5=2E a.a is renamed to c.c, thereby clearing its backup dateH 6=2E /back/since=3D&date to tape2 does not save c.c for it has no backup date  B So, this file, which is newer than both image backups, will not beE restored under either name if the tape from step 6 is the newest tape G in an incremental restore operation of tape2 save sets. Yes, it will be G picked up in the next tape2 incremental, if it's not renamed again, but  that's a day late.  F Whether this is serious problem may depend on your what your site does
 and needs.  * And what if the file is renamed yet again?    C Here's an example of how renaming a file clears its backup date and  foils the tape2 backup.    $ DIR/DATE=3D(M,B) A.A   Directory _DSA1:[SCRATCH.AAA]   ? A=2EA;1                      0/0        16-JUN-2005 13:04:51.98  16-JUN-2005 13:05:14.63    Total of 1 file, 0/0 blocks.
 $ REN A.A C.C 6 %RENAME-I-RENAMED, _DSA1:[SCRATCH.AAA]A.A;1 renamed to _DSA1:[SCRATCH.AAA]C.C;1 $ DIR/DATE=3D(M,B) C.C   Directory _DSA1:[SCRATCH.AAA]   E C=2EC;1                      0/0        16-JUN-2005 13:05:27.75   <No  backup recorded>   Total of 1 file, 0/0 blocks. $ < $ BACK/LOG */BACK/SINC=3D16-JUN-2005 NL:A.B/SAVE  ! to tape2B %BACKUP-W-NOFILES, no files selected from _DSA1:[SCRATCH.AAA]*.*;* $  [=2E..]    ------------------------------    Date: 16 Jun 2005 06:08:48 -0700 From: bob@instantwhip.com < Subject: Re: Intel neuters Montvale, Itanic screams in alarmC Message-ID: <1118927328.753592.175940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   G "I mean, hasn't 'liberal media' become too blatant an oxymoron for even   B people like you to try to pawn off any more?  Come to think of it,C considering the whoppers your idols in the administration are still @ vomiting up on a regular basis about our audacious experiment in# annexation in Iraq, probably not. "   D wrong as usual Bill ... Iraq is a fight againset terrorism ... where are all F these terrorists coming from ... some from syria but the majority fromG Iran ... we are at war Bill ... didn't 9/11 wake you up yet, or did you  needC to be on the top floor of one of the trade center buildings to open  your blind liberal eyes ...   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.334 ************************