In explaining this update, you state, "Fix 2.97c regression which could cause and erroneous prompt for file #1." I may be the only one on this that does not understand what this means, so could you explain it in a bit more detail? I have no idea what "file #1" refers to, nor do I know what "regression" means in this context.
Thanks,
Jack Greenberg
IFL v.297d
-
Bob Coleman
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 5:58 pm
Re: IFL v.297d
file #1 is, or would be if it existed, some sort of hash file optionally created to facilitate (speed up) creating differential and/or incremental backups.
"Regression" in this context means an error that was introduced in version 297c that caused an inappropriate request for a non-existent #1 file.
Simple explanation: Version 297d corrects a problem that was introduced in version 2.97c.
See http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ucf/vi ... f=4&t=1944 for background.
"Regression" in this context means an error that was introduced in version 297c that caused an inappropriate request for a non-existent #1 file.
Simple explanation: Version 297d corrects a problem that was introduced in version 2.97c.
See http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/ucf/vi ... f=4&t=1944 for background.
Re: IFL v.297d
Can I assume that this update is a non-issue for me if I don't do incremental or differential backups?
-
Bob Coleman
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 5:58 pm
Re: IFL v.297d
jack450 wrote:
> Can I assume that this update is a non-issue for me if I don't do
> incremental or differential backups?
I would certainly think so, but I don't speak for Terabyte support.
> Can I assume that this update is a non-issue for me if I don't do
> incremental or differential backups?
I would certainly think so, but I don't speak for Terabyte support.