On Apr 18, 7:46 am, e...@hotmail.com wrote:
> I have a few 2.6gb files that can't be seen by the -f flag in the "if"
> shell command.
>
> Example:
>
> #
> #
> ls -l *.bkf
> -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2674424832 Apr 13 04:22 fri.bkf
> -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675064832 Apr 16 04:21 mon.bkf
> -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2673615872 Apr 12 04:22 thu.bkf
> -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 17 04:22 tue.bkf
> -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 18 04:22 wed.bkf
> #
> #
> # [ -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
> #
> # [ ! -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
> yes
> #
> #
>
> Explanation: The first if statement SHOULD print "yes" but doesn't.
> The second does print yes but shouldn't.
>
> This problem is causing lone-tar to fail, but it really isn't a lone-
> tar problem since it happens in a simple shell script also. But lone-
> tar didn't get this error until I upgraded from lone-tar 4.2 to
> 4.2.2. I don't know why the shell f flag is broken. (yes I tried
> the /u95/bin/sh)
>
> Lone-tar log shows the following:
>
> lone-tar: can't find thu.bkf because...Value too large for defined
> data type
> lone-tar: can't find fri.bkf because...Value too large for defined
> data type
> ENDED: Wed Apr 18 01:02:26 CDT
> 2007
> ************************************************** ****************************
> RESULT: WARNING(15): LONE-TAR Master Backup (cron)
> FAILED!!!
> ************************************************** ****************************
> ************************************************** ****************************
> Verify ABORTED since Backup FAILED!!! Wed Apr 18 01:02:27 CDT
> 2007
> ************************************************** ****************************
>
> I've tried the /bin/sh and /u95/bin/sh with no diff.
>
> I believe that OSR6 should be treated like a OSR507 system - ie; NO
> FILES OVER 2 GIG ALLOWED. I'm ok with that because I don't really
> need the large files anyway. I was just using the storage as a
> redundantly redundant redundancy.
>
> OSR6 is the large file system that doesn't like large files. ( so
> neither do I )

You may not actually be executing the /u95/bin shell. "[" is in /usr/
bin so it's not exactly the same as an "if." Try
if [ -f xxxxx ] ; then ...

If your LoneTar release isn't specifically for OS6 it may not have the
large file support anyway.

Those /u95/bin utilities are a nuisance. They don't seem complete and
don't always behave the same way as their counterparts in /usr/bin.

--RLR

ThreeStar wrote (on Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 08:47:26AM -0700):

| On Apr 18, 7:46 am, e...@hotmail.com wrote:
| > I have a few 2.6gb files that can't be seen by the -f flag in the "if"
| > shell command.
| >
| > Example:
| >
| > #
| > #
| > ls -l *.bkf
| > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2674424832 Apr 13 04:22 fri.bkf
| > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675064832 Apr 16 04:21 mon.bkf
| > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2673615872 Apr 12 04:22 thu.bkf
| > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 17 04:22 tue.bkf
| > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 18 04:22 wed.bkf
| > #
| > #
| > # [ -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
| > #
| > # [ ! -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
| > yes
| > #
| > #
| >
| > Explanation: The first if statement SHOULD print "yes" but doesn't.
| > The second does print yes but shouldn't.
| >
| > This problem is causing lone-tar to fail, but it really isn't a lone-
| > tar problem since it happens in a simple shell script also. But lone-
| > tar didn't get this error until I upgraded from lone-tar 4.2 to
| > 4.2.2. I don't know why the shell f flag is broken. (yes I tried
| > the /u95/bin/sh)
| >
| > Lone-tar log shows the following:
| >
| > lone-tar: can't find thu.bkf because...Value too large for defined
| > data type
| > lone-tar: can't find fri.bkf because...Value too large for defined
| > data type
| > ENDED: Wed Apr 18 01:02:26 CDT
| > 2007
| > ************************************************** ****************************
| > RESULT: WARNING(15): LONE-TAR Master Backup (cron)
| > FAILED!!!
| > ************************************************** ****************************
| > ************************************************** ****************************
| > Verify ABORTED since Backup FAILED!!! Wed Apr 18 01:02:27 CDT
| > 2007
| > ************************************************** ****************************
| >
| > I've tried the /bin/sh and /u95/bin/sh with no diff.
| >
| > I believe that OSR6 should be treated like a OSR507 system - ie; NO
| > FILES OVER 2 GIG ALLOWED. I'm ok with that because I don't really
| > need the large files anyway. I was just using the storage as a
| > redundantly redundant redundancy.
| >
| > OSR6 is the large file system that doesn't like large files. ( so
| > neither do I )
|
| You may not actually be executing the /u95/bin shell. "[" is in /usr/
| bin so it's not exactly the same as an "if." Try
| if [ -f xxxxx ] ; then ...
|
| If your LoneTar release isn't specifically for OS6 it may not have the
| large file support anyway.
|
| Those /u95/bin utilities are a nuisance. They don't seem complete and
| don't always behave the same way as their counterparts in /usr/bin.
|
| --RLR

FWIW, I just read "Managing Large Files on VxFS" in DocView, and it
says that /u95/bin/sh and /u95/bin/ksh are not large file aware, but
bash and zsh are (at least in-so-far as shell redirection).

Bob

--
Bob Stockler +-+ bob@trebor.iglou.com +-+ http://members.iglou.com/trebor

On Apr 18, 10:47 am, ThreeStar wrote:
> On Apr 18, 7:46 am, e...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I have a few 2.6gb files that can't be seen by the -f flag in the "if"
> > shell command.
>
> > Example:
>
> > #
> > #
> > ls -l *.bkf
> > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2674424832 Apr 13 04:22 fri.bkf
> > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675064832 Apr 16 04:21 mon.bkf
> > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2673615872 Apr 12 04:22 thu.bkf
> > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 17 04:22 tue.bkf
> > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 18 04:22 wed.bkf
> > #
> > #
> > # [ -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
> > #
> > # [ ! -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
> > yes
> > #
> > #
>
> > Explanation: The first if statement SHOULD print "yes" but doesn't.
> > The second does print yes but shouldn't.
>
> > This problem is causing lone-tar to fail, but it really isn't a lone-
> > tar problem since it happens in a simple shell script also. But lone-
> > tar didn't get this error until I upgraded from lone-tar 4.2 to
> > 4.2.2. I don't know why the shell f flag is broken. (yes I tried
> > the /u95/bin/sh)
>
> > Lone-tar log shows the following:
>
> > lone-tar: can't find thu.bkf because...Value too large for defined
> > data type
> > lone-tar: can't find fri.bkf because...Value too large for defined
> > data type
> > ENDED: Wed Apr 18 01:02:26 CDT
> > 2007
> > ************************************************** *****************************
> > RESULT: WARNING(15): LONE-TAR Master Backup (cron)
> > FAILED!!!
> > ************************************************** *****************************
> > ************************************************** *****************************
> > Verify ABORTED since Backup FAILED!!! Wed Apr 18 01:02:27 CDT
> > 2007
> > ************************************************** *****************************
>
> > I've tried the /bin/sh and /u95/bin/sh with no diff.
>
> > I believe that OSR6 should be treated like a OSR507 system - ie; NO
> > FILES OVER 2 GIG ALLOWED. I'm ok with that because I don't really
> > need the large files anyway. I was just using the storage as a
> > redundantly redundant redundancy.
>
> > OSR6 is the large file system that doesn't like large files. ( so
> > neither do I )
>
> You may not actually be executing the /u95/bin shell. "[" is in /usr/
> bin so it's not exactly the same as an "if." Try
> if [ -f xxxxx ] ; then ...
>
> If your LoneTar release isn't specifically for OS6 it may not have the
> large file support anyway.
> I've tried the "if [ -f ...." method also without success...

I am trying a backup with NO large files in the system.
If that works, then I'll consider the problem solved.
I never cared about large files anyway.


> Those /u95/bin utilities are a nuisance. They don't seem complete and
> don't always behave the same way as their counterparts in /usr/bin.
>


I agree. /u95 was an unexpected wrinkle in the fabric of my
universe.
I had more than enough wrinkles.

I don't know what the goal was when they started the inclusion of this
LARGE FS, but I believe the experiment hasn't turned out well,. It
happens that way sometimes.

etnuf@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Apr 18, 10:47 am, ThreeStar wrote:
> > On Apr 18, 7:46 am, e...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > I have a few 2.6gb files that can't be seen by the -f flag in the "if"
> > > shell command.
> >
> > > Example:
> >
> > > #
> > > #
> > > ls -l *.bkf
> > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2674424832 Apr 13 04:22 fri.bkf
> > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675064832 Apr 16 04:21 mon.bkf
> > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2673615872 Apr 12 04:22 thu.bkf
> > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 17 04:22 tue.bkf
> > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 18 04:22 wed.bkf
> > > #
> > > #
> > > # [ -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
> > > #
> > > # [ ! -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
> > > yes
> > > #
> > > #
> >
> > > Explanation: The first if statement SHOULD print "yes" but doesn't.
> > > The second does print yes but shouldn't.
> >
> > > This problem is causing lone-tar to fail, but it really isn't a lone-
> > > tar problem since it happens in a simple shell script also. But lone-
> > > tar didn't get this error until I upgraded from lone-tar 4.2 to
> > > 4.2.2. I don't know why the shell f flag is broken. (yes I tried
> > > the /u95/bin/sh)
> >
> > > Lone-tar log shows the following:
> >
> > > lone-tar: can't find thu.bkf because...Value too large for defined
> > > data type
> > > lone-tar: can't find fri.bkf because...Value too large for defined
> > > data type
> > > ENDED: Wed Apr 18 01:02:26 CDT
> > > 2007
> > > ************************************************** *****************************
> > > RESULT: WARNING(15): LONE-TAR Master Backup (cron)
> > > FAILED!!!
> > > ************************************************** *****************************
> > > ************************************************** *****************************
> > > Verify ABORTED since Backup FAILED!!! Wed Apr 18 01:02:27 CDT
> > > 2007
> > > ************************************************** *****************************
> >
> > > I've tried the /bin/sh and /u95/bin/sh with no diff.
> >
> > > I believe that OSR6 should be treated like a OSR507 system - ie; NO
> > > FILES OVER 2 GIG ALLOWED. I'm ok with that because I don't really
> > > need the large files anyway. I was just using the storage as a
> > > redundantly redundant redundancy.
> >
> > > OSR6 is the large file system that doesn't like large files. ( so
> > > neither do I )
> >
> > You may not actually be executing the /u95/bin shell. "[" is in /usr/
> > bin so it's not exactly the same as an "if." Try
> > if [ -f xxxxx ] ; then ...
> >
> > If your LoneTar release isn't specifically for OS6 it may not have the
> > large file support anyway.
> > I've tried the "if [ -f ...." method also without success...
>
> I am trying a backup with NO large files in the system.
> If that works, then I'll consider the problem solved.
> I never cared about large files anyway.
>
>
> > Those /u95/bin utilities are a nuisance. They don't seem complete and
> > don't always behave the same way as their counterparts in /usr/bin.
> >
>
>
> I agree. /u95 was an unexpected wrinkle in the fabric of my
> universe.
> I had more than enough wrinkles.
>
> I don't know what the goal was when they started the inclusion of this
> LARGE FS, but I believe the experiment hasn't turned out well,. It
> happens that way sometimes.

One last followup...

I removed the 5 large files, and now lone-tar completes successfully.

It was a strange error because I had included the 5 large files in the
exclude.M list hoping to prevent those files from being backed up.
But lone-tar would see the files, and error on "Value too large for
defined data type" and consider that a backup failure even though
these files were listed in the exclude.M file. The backup failure
would then cause lone-tar to bypass the verify phase. A manual verify
showed the backup was ok (less the 5 big files of course)

etnuf@hotmail.com typed (on Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 02:03:14PM -0700):
|
| etnuf@hotmail.com wrote:
| > On Apr 18, 10:47 am, ThreeStar wrote:
| > > On Apr 18, 7:46 am, e...@hotmail.com wrote:
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > >
| > > > I have a few 2.6gb files that can't be seen by the -f flag in the "if"
| > > > shell command.
| > >
| > > > Example:
| > >
| > > > #
| > > > #
| > > > ls -l *.bkf
| > > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2674424832 Apr 13 04:22 fri.bkf
| > > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675064832 Apr 16 04:21 mon.bkf
| > > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2673615872 Apr 12 04:22 thu.bkf
| > > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 17 04:22 tue.bkf
| > > > -rw-rw-rw- 1 peach group 2675569664 Apr 18 04:22 wed.bkf
| > > > #
| > > > #
| > > > # [ -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
| > > > #
| > > > # [ ! -f fri.bkf ] && echo yes
| > > > yes
| > > > #
| > > > #
| > >
| > > > Explanation: The first if statement SHOULD print "yes" but doesn't.
| > > > The second does print yes but shouldn't.
| > >
| > > > This problem is causing lone-tar to fail, but it really isn't a lone-
| > > > tar problem since it happens in a simple shell script also. But lone-
| > > > tar didn't get this error until I upgraded from lone-tar 4.2 to
| > > > 4.2.2. I don't know why the shell f flag is broken. (yes I tried
| > > > the /u95/bin/sh)
| > >
| > > > Lone-tar log shows the following:
| > >
| > > > lone-tar: can't find thu.bkf because...Value too large for defined
| > > > data type
| > > > lone-tar: can't find fri.bkf because...Value too large for defined
| > > > data type
| > > > ENDED: Wed Apr 18 01:02:26 CDT
| > > > 2007
| > > > ************************************************** *****************************
| > > > RESULT: WARNING(15): LONE-TAR Master Backup (cron)
| > > > FAILED!!!
| > > > ************************************************** *****************************
| > > > ************************************************** *****************************
| > > > Verify ABORTED since Backup FAILED!!! Wed Apr 18 01:02:27 CDT
| > > > 2007
| > > > ************************************************** *****************************
| > >
| > > > I've tried the /bin/sh and /u95/bin/sh with no diff.
| > >
| > > > I believe that OSR6 should be treated like a OSR507 system - ie; NO
| > > > FILES OVER 2 GIG ALLOWED. I'm ok with that because I don't really
| > > > need the large files anyway. I was just using the storage as a
| > > > redundantly redundant redundancy.
| > >
| > > > OSR6 is the large file system that doesn't like large files. ( so
| > > > neither do I )
| > >
| > > You may not actually be executing the /u95/bin shell. "[" is in /usr/
| > > bin so it's not exactly the same as an "if." Try
| > > if [ -f xxxxx ] ; then ...
| > >
| > > If your LoneTar release isn't specifically for OS6 it may not have the
| > > large file support anyway.
| > > I've tried the "if [ -f ...." method also without success...
| >
| > I am trying a backup with NO large files in the system.
| > If that works, then I'll consider the problem solved.
| > I never cared about large files anyway.
| >
| >
| > > Those /u95/bin utilities are a nuisance. They don't seem complete and
| > > don't always behave the same way as their counterparts in /usr/bin.
| > >
| >
| >
| > I agree. /u95 was an unexpected wrinkle in the fabric of my
| > universe.
| > I had more than enough wrinkles.
| >
| > I don't know what the goal was when they started the inclusion of this
| > LARGE FS, but I believe the experiment hasn't turned out well,. It
| > happens that way sometimes.
|
| One last followup...
|
| I removed the 5 large files, and now lone-tar completes successfully.
|
| It was a strange error because I had included the 5 large files in the
| exclude.M list hoping to prevent those files from being backed up.
| But lone-tar would see the files, and error on "Value too large for
| defined data type" and consider that a backup failure even though
| these files were listed in the exclude.M file. The backup failure
| would then cause lone-tar to bypass the verify phase. A manual verify
| showed the backup was ok (less the 5 big files of course)

Hello,

Do you get a LONE-TAR Serial Number so I can track this?

Thanks,
Jeff Hyman
.--.
___________________________ .-. | | _____________________________________
Lone Star Software Corp. | | | | .-. Home of World Famous LONE-TAR(tm)
Cactus International, Inc. | |_| | | | Backup Software for UNIX and LINUX
Sales: 800.525.8649 _ |___ |_| | 24x7 Support Available
Support: 301.829.1622 _| ~- | ___| RESCUE-RANGER(tm) and AIR-BAG(tm)
http://www.LONE-TAR.com \, _} | | Disaster Recovery Software
-------------------------- \( -- | | --------------------------------------
| |