Go to solution
Scott Van Kalken
Esteemed Contributor


Does anyone know what the command line is for Ignite-UX B.3.5.89 to update the makerec.last file?

I have run an ignite using make_tape_recovery -v -A -x inc_entire=vg00 -a /dev/rmt/0mn

when I run a check_recovery it tells me that I haven't used the -C option, which is the older version of ignite.

i.e. - make_recovery -v -C -A -d /dev/rmt/0m

I performed an swremove on the old version before installing this one.

Steven Gillard_2
Honored Contributor

Re: check_recovery

I'm running B.3.3.116 and have the same issue. According to the release notes in /opt/ignite/share/doc/release-note:

- The check_recovery command only works with data produced by
make_recovery, it will be changed in a later release to work only
with make_tape_recovery.

On this release make_recovery -C still works, so your workaround would be to use that until the release when check_recovery is updated to work with make_tape_recovery.

James R. Ferguson
Acclaimed Contributor

Re: check_recovery

Hi Scott:

Personally, I tnink you should abandon 'check_recovery' and continue to use the newer, more robust 'make_tape_recovery' instead of its predecessor 'make_recovery'. In my opinion, its easier to unconditionally run 'make_tape_recovery' rather than using 'check_recovery' to see what has changed and whether or not you "might" want to make a new recovery tape.


Patrick Wallek
Honored Contributor

Re: check_recovery

I agree 110% with JRF on this issue.

When you use the -C option with make_recovery, it adds a tremendous amount to the time it takes to run your make_recovery.

My philosophy on this is: If you think you need to run another make_(tape_)recovery tape then you probably do.

I personally have it set to run automatically every Sunday afternoon on my machines. I have 4 tapes that I rotate through and I send these offsite along with all of my other backup tapes for DR purposes.

I had heard at one point that the -C option was not going to be available at some point in the future anyway. Don't know if that is still true or not as that was over a year ago.
Scott Van Kalken
Esteemed Contributor

Re: check_recovery

Thanks for the responses everyone.

I agree, another make_tape_recovery is better, but I occasionally like to run a check_recovery just to make 100% sure is all.