Operating System - OpenVMS
1753758 Members
4894 Online
108799 Solutions
New Discussion юеВ

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

 
SOLVED
Go to solution
Doug Phillips
Trusted Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

Okay, I re-read and I see you did post your drive types. Also, it looks like maybe backup did auto-mount in 5.n, so never mind that. Looking at New Features manual, nothing there to explain the problem. Sorry.
John Gillings
Honored Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

Stanley,

Could you please post the EXACT error message?
A crucible of informative mistakes
Antoniov.
Honored Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

Stanley,
ANSI labelled error does happen when software can't read header record of tape. Your vms command are right!
Check for hardware.

Antonio Vigliotti
Antonio Maria Vigliotti
Daniel Fernandez Illan
Trusted Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

Stanley
I think that BACKUP command is a feature generally not compatible between versions or releases of OS.
For me, the best solution to migrate is generate a STABACKIT in a box, mount both disks
and use BACKUP/IMAGE to copy the system.
Saludos.
Daniel
Uwe Zessin
Honored Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

> generally not compatible

I strongly disagree! While there have been some incompatibilities, BACKUP usually shines in this area.
.
Antoniov.
Honored Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5


generally not compatible


Strongly disagree, too.
I backuped and restored throght different OS version, from V4.6 until V7.3-2

Antonio Vigliotti
Antonio Maria Vigliotti
Bojan Nemec
Honored Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

Stanley,

I agree with Antonio that this is probably a tape reading error. And also agree with Uwe and Antonio about BACKUP incompatibilities. Backup is compatible with previous versions and in most cases (what I have try in all) forward compatible.

Try to check the tape with:

$ mount/over=id mua0:
$ dir mua0:

If it works (but probably will not) this means that the tape is OK. If you have enought space on a spare disk you can copy the saveset to the disk with the copy command and than restore from there.

Bojan
Robert_Boyd
Respected Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

I'm still confused about which drive(s) you're trying to use to create the backup on the V5.5 system.

I also don't really understand about why you said the TZ87 is read only. One possibility I haven't seen mentioned relates to tape format incompatibilities -- I don't have enough grasp of exactly which equipment you're using to be sure.

If you're trying to write tapes on the TZ87 that were previously initialized on a TK50 you very likely will have some difficulties.

Are the tapes that you're trying to use "virgin" tapes, or ones that have been used before on another device?

Robert
Master you were right about 1 thing -- the negotiations were SHORT!
Stanley F Quayle
Valued Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

> I'm still confused about which drive(s)
> you're trying to use to create the backup on
> the V5.5 system.

That's because I'm trying to do the backup on the V5.0 MicroVAX II. It has a built-in TK50 drive, and a non-SCSI 9-track tape drive.

On the new VAX side, I'm using a TZ87 drive. TZ87 drives can read TK50 and TK70 tapes, but can't write to them. It detects the tape type by encodings in the plastic case.

The client doesn't have any new TK50 tapes, because no new tapes have been made in years.

[By the way -- TZ87N drives don't have the capability to read TK50 or TK70 tapes, in case you're looking for that functionality.]
http://www.stanq.com/charon-vax.html
Daniel Fernandez Illan
Trusted Contributor

Re: BACKUP changes from V5.0 to V5.5

Sorry Antonio & Uwe

I had a similar problem with "LABEL TAPES" - tape not being ANSI labelled - (TK50) between versions of VMS (5.5 and 6.2) with a microVAX 3100. If I executed a BACKUP/IMAGE in 5.5 version then the error message referent to tape label was show when I executed restore in 6.2 version. If the version was the same, logically the error didn't exist.

Saludos.
Daniel.