How serious is warning about "exclude" function?

[jeffw_00]

Hi - I have a 1/2 full 1TB disk which is 90% re-downloadable material and so doesn't need backing up. Since this 90% is all in one directory tree this seems like an ideal application of the

/exlist=filename

function. However, the manual includes a "use at your own risk" warning. Not asking TBI to take any responsibility, but is this something that usually works, or is truly experimental, or??

Thanks!
/j

[jeffw_00]

nobody?

[Brian K]

Jeff,

Have you considered moving the folder tree to another partition? Then you can cleanly backup your OS partition. Doing an excluded files backup is time consuming.

[TeraByte Support]

it can confuse people and depending on the number of files/sub dirs it has
to process them on restore to delete them.

"jeffw_00" wrote in message news:9180@public.image...

Hi - I have a 1/2 full 1TB disk which is 90% re-downloadable material and so
doesn't need backing up. Since this 90% is all in one directory tree this
seems like an ideal application of the

/exlist=filename

function. However, the manual includes a "use at your own risk" warning.
Not asking TBI to take any responsibility, but is this something that
usually works, or is truly experimental, or??

Thanks!
/j

[jeffw_00]

I'm not at liberty to re-partition the system. I think the answer is that it's safe to use but can make for a time-consuming restore. I will be excluding only one folder and all its subfolders, and don't need the subfolders restored on a restore.

Thanks
/j