Bug 21093

Summary: New option for restore (patch)
Product: Base System Reporter: Stefan Moeding <s.moeding>
Component: binAssignee: freebsd-bugs (Nobody) <bugs>
Status: Closed FIXED    
Severity: Affects Only Me    
Priority: Normal    
Version: 4.1-STABLE   
Hardware: Any   
OS: Any   
Attachments:
Description Flags
file.diff none

Description Stefan Moeding 2000-09-07 17:10:00 UTC 
	The vrestore command in Compaqs Tru64 Unix has an option '-D',
	which allows the vrestore command to perform a chdir into a
	given directory before performing the restore.  This allows the
	simpler command line

		dump -0af - /usr | restore -rf - -D /mnt

	instead of

		dump -0 -a -f - /usr | (cd /mnt; restore -r -f -)

Fix: The attached patch adds the '-D' flag to the restore command.

	Stefan

==============================================================================
Comment 1 mjacob 2000-09-07 17:12:06 UTC 
Other than making this look like Tru64's changes, why is this desirable?
Comment 2 Stefan Moeding 2000-09-07 17:20:12 UTC 
Matthew Jacob writes:

> Other than making this look like Tru64's changes, why is this desirable?

To avoid the (IMHO!) awkward subshell.

Stefan
Comment 3 mjacob 2000-09-07 17:21:26 UTC 
IMO, this is not sufficient enough reason to add the feature.


On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Stefan Moeding wrote:

> Matthew Jacob writes:
> 
> > Other than making this look like Tru64's changes, why is this desirable?
> 
> To avoid the (IMHO!) awkward subshell.
> 
> Stefan
>
Comment 4 Will Andrews 2000-09-07 17:51:02 UTC 
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:30:03AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
>  IMO, this is not sufficient enough reason to add the feature.

I agree with Matt.  If X feature does not require complex scripts, it's
probably not going to be added to Y program (see df -c, etc.).

-- 
Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu> <will@FreeBSD.org>
GCS/E/S @d- s+:+ a--- C++ UB++++$ P+ L- E--- W+ N-- !o ?K w---
O- M+ V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+>+++ t++ 5 X+ R+ tv+ b++ DI+++ D+ 
G++ e>++++ h! r- y?
Comment 5 mjacob 2000-09-07 19:30:57 UTC 
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:30:03AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote:
> >  IMO, this is not sufficient enough reason to add the feature.
> 
> I agree with Matt.  If X feature does not require complex scripts, it's
> probably not going to be added to Y program (see df -c, etc.).

If there were some overriding other reason, like, "Amanda needs it", or
"PicoBSD needs it and doesn't like to run subshells", or "subshells are bad",
I could go for it. It's a trivial change.

But, especially for dump (which should Die! Die! Die!), creeping featurism
probably should be avoided.
Comment 6 Sheldon Hearn freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2000-09-08 13:39:43 UTC 
State Changed
From-To: open->feedback

So can we close this, or what? :-)
Comment 7 Sheldon Hearn freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2000-09-08 15:41:59 UTC 
State Changed
From-To: feedback->closed

Nobody seems to think this should be included.  The patch 
remains here for all to see, of course.