Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:30:14 +0000 From: Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com> To: Paolo Tealdi <paolo.tealdi@polito.it> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dump level 9 Message-ID: <441E9246.6090603@dial.pipex.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.0.20060320085802.01fe6100@polito.it> References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060315131135.0327a978@polito.it> <441821AD.1080605@dial.pipex.com> <7.0.1.0.0.20060315153306.02165290@polito.it> <4418344D.8080003@dial.pipex.com> <7.0.1.0.0.20060316091138.01fa4ae8@polito.it> <44194A05.4010600@dial.pipex.com> <7.0.1.0.0.20060316133119.020459c8@polito.it> <441966C6.1000001@dial.pipex.com> <7.0.1.0.0.20060320085802.01fe6100@polito.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Paolo Tealdi wrote: > Hurra ! > I resolved! Excellent! > > Obviously newfs did not resolve. :-( > But... > i studied the problem from another point of view reading dump sources, > as you suggested. > dump thinks that file has changed if : > a) modification date has changed > b) cdate has changed : cdate is the date of inode modification > > throught stat utility (very nice) i noticed that every file under > /home had a cdate very recent. > comparing dates i got solution : sophos antivirus, that starts every > night with a complete /home scan, modifies cdate. > Unfortunately i installed sophos antivirus more or less in the same > days of the power cut ... Damn. Kicking myself for not asking you about cdate. > > I think that sophos support will receive a question in the next few > days ... :-) Shame your email can't include a big kick in the pants for whoever a) thought this was a good idea in the first place b) didn't pick up such dumb behaviour in testing. --Alex
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?441E9246.6090603>