Ketan,
Your test wasn't doing what you thought it did; it didn't copy the saveset to disk.
From your test:
-------------------------
$ backup/log PHYSICAL.LIS;2 $2$MGA5:test.bck/save/ignore=label
%BACKUP-S-COPIED, copied SYS$SYSDEVICE:[BACKUP]PHYSICAL.LIS;2
$
$ backup/log/rewind/ignore=label $2$MGA5:test.bck []test.bck
%BACKUP-S-CREATED, created SYS$SYSDEVICE:[BACKUP]TEST.BCK;2
$ dir test.bck
Directory SYS$SYSDEVICE:[BACKUP]
TEST.BCK;2
Total of 1 file.
$ backup/list SYS$SYSDEVICE:[BACKUP]TEST.BCK;2/save
Listing of save set(s)
%BACKUP-F-NOTSAVESET, SYS$SYSDEVICE:[BACKUP]TEST.BCK;2 is not a BACKUP save set
-------------------------
The command: $ backup/log/rewind/ignore=label $2$MGA5:test.bck []test.bck
is restoring PHYICAL.LIS;2 from the test.bck saveset to a specified file name []TEST.BCK
The version ;2 is coming from rms parsing from PHYICAL.LIS;2
$ set def sys$sysdevice:[backup]
$ write sys$output f$parse("TEST.BCK","[]PHYSICAL.LIS;2")
SYS$SYSDEVICE:[BACKUP]TEST.BCK;2
$
If you would have issued the command:
$ differences physical.lis;2 test.bck;2
you would have gotten
Number of difference sections found: 0
Number of difference records found: 0
DIFFERENCES /IGNORE=()/MERGED=1-
SYS$SYSDEVICE:[BACKUP]PHYSICAL.LIS;2-
SYS$SYSDEVICE:[BACKUP]TEST.BCK;2
$
If the save set would have had more than a single file in it, what was happening would have been more obvious.
Backup is powerful, but it isn't always obvious what a command is doing.
Jon
it depends
