Guest Anthony Buckland Posted August 26, 2008 Posted August 26, 2008 I've been working on a supplementary form of backup (other than my more-or-less regular backups with Acronis True Image of my entire C: partition). The volatile part of my file system is My Documents, into which I've incorporated my Outlook Express storage files and my Address Book. So I've backed this up by straight copying to a thumb drive, which is a very compact and durable way IMHO to carry around a fire/theft backup, and safe since it's password-protected. Now to the incremental part. The technique I've just tried for the first time is to plug in the thumb drive (J:), go to command mode, in C: go to My Documents, in J: go to the corresponding directory, then in C: enter XCOPY *.* J: /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K Benefits: fast as h___, three and a half minutes to deal with just over 8 Gby; and doesn't bother me with "do you really want to change this file?". (Today's test found 41 files to copy out of 5698.) Further benefit, thumb drive is available to show friends things, demonstrate, share, load things from them, all without presence of Acronis. Drawback, possibly, doesn't ask me "do you really want to change this file?". Further drawback, have to enter the commands correctly -- I need to get this into a batch file. I don't imagine I'm the first to hit on this technique -- any comments or cautions? ------------------------------------------------------------------ A postscript: incremental backups save changes and copy new data, but AFAIK they don't copy to the backup the absence of data that have been deleted. If you back up incrementally enough times, you're slowly going to accumulate a collection of things in the backup that shouldn't be there yet would be restored if you use the original backup and all its increments to restore a system. Does any backup software cure this problem?
Guest Bob Harris Posted August 26, 2008 Posted August 26, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY I have been using the XCOPY command in a batch file for years to backup personal files. Open NOTEPAD and type the variation of the XCOPY command you like. You may add any number of lines beginning with "REM", without the quotes, as comments. Save, exit NOTEPAD, then rename with extension "BAT". Double-click on the BAT file to run it. Or, make a desktop short-cut, and just press that button. You might also want to use the /S option, to recursively copy subdirectories. And, there is an option /EXCLUDE:excludefile.txt, where "excludefile.txt" is a simple text file that contains files and/or directories not to copy. "excludefile.txt" is not a special name; it could just as well be called "xxx.txt". The format of the exclude file is one line per file or directory, such as: \RECYCLED\ \SYSTEM VOLUME INFORMATION\ \TEMP\ *.BAK "Anthony Buckland" <anthonybucklandnospam@telus.net> wrote in message news:OzQ%23rW8BJHA.4576@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > I've been working on a supplementary form of backup (other than > my more-or-less regular backups with Acronis True Image of my > entire C: partition). The volatile part of my file system is My > Documents, into which I've incorporated my Outlook Express > storage files and my Address Book. So I've backed this up by > straight copying to a thumb drive, which is a very compact and > durable way IMHO to carry around a fire/theft backup, and safe > since it's password-protected. > > Now to the incremental part. The technique I've just tried for the > first time is to plug in the thumb drive (J:), go to command mode, > in C: go to My Documents, in J: go to the corresponding > directory, then in C: enter > > XCOPY *.* J: /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K > > Benefits: fast as h___, three and a half minutes to deal with just > over 8 Gby; and doesn't bother me with "do you really want to > change this file?". (Today's test found 41 files to copy out of > 5698.) Further benefit, thumb drive is available to show friends > things, demonstrate, share, load things from them, all without > presence of Acronis. > > Drawback, possibly, doesn't ask me "do you really want to > change this file?". Further drawback, have to enter the commands > correctly -- I need to get this into a batch file. > > I don't imagine I'm the first to hit on this technique -- any > comments or cautions? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > A postscript: incremental backups save changes and copy new > data, but AFAIK they don't copy to the backup the absence of > data that have been deleted. If you back up incrementally > enough times, you're slowly going to accumulate a collection > of things in the backup that shouldn't be there yet would be > restored if you use the original backup and all its increments > to restore a system. Does any backup software cure this > problem? >
Guest Pegasus \(MVP\) Posted August 26, 2008 Posted August 26, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY See below. "Anthony Buckland" <anthonybucklandnospam@telus.net> wrote in message news:OzQ%23rW8BJHA.4576@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > I've been working on a supplementary form of backup (other than > my more-or-less regular backups with Acronis True Image of my > entire C: partition). The volatile part of my file system is My > Documents, into which I've incorporated my Outlook Express > storage files and my Address Book. So I've backed this up by > straight copying to a thumb drive, which is a very compact and > durable way IMHO to carry around a fire/theft backup, and safe > since it's password-protected. > > Now to the incremental part. The technique I've just tried for the > first time is to plug in the thumb drive (J:), go to command mode, > in C: go to My Documents, in J: go to the corresponding > directory, then in C: enter > > XCOPY *.* J: /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K > > Benefits: fast as h___, three and a half minutes to deal with just > over 8 Gby; and doesn't bother me with "do you really want to > change this file?". (Today's test found 41 files to copy out of > 5698.) Further benefit, thumb drive is available to show friends > things, demonstrate, share, load things from them, all without > presence of Acronis. > > Drawback, possibly, doesn't ask me "do you really want to > change this file?". *** xcopy.exe does not produce any such message. What does *** it really say? *** If you're referring to the "replace" prompt - your "/Y" switch *** takes care of it. > Further drawback, have to enter the commands > correctly -- I need to get this into a batch file. *** OK, put it into a batch file and don't forget to specify both *** the source and the target drive and folder! @echo off XCOPY "c:\My Documents\Anthony\*.*" J:\ /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K > I don't imagine I'm the first to hit on this technique -- any > comments or cautions? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > A postscript: incremental backups save changes and copy new > data, but AFAIK they don't copy to the backup the absence of > data that have been deleted. If you back up incrementally > enough times, you're slowly going to accumulate a collection > of things in the backup that shouldn't be there yet would be > restored if you use the original backup and all its increments > to restore a system. Does any backup software cure this > problem? Use robocopy.exe. It has switches that will create a mirror of the source at the target location. You can download it from here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=9D467A69-57FF-4AE7-96EE-B18C4790CFFD&displaylang=en
Guest Anthony Buckland Posted August 26, 2008 Posted August 26, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY "Pegasus (MVP)" <I.can@fly.com.oz> wrote in message news:%23xvzmd8BJHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > See below. > > "Anthony Buckland" <anthonybucklandnospam@telus.net> wrote in message > news:OzQ%23rW8BJHA.4576@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> I've been working on a supplementary form of backup (other than >> my more-or-less regular backups with Acronis True Image of my >> entire C: partition). The volatile part of my file system is My >> Documents, into which I've incorporated my Outlook Express >> storage files and my Address Book. So I've backed this up by >> straight copying to a thumb drive, which is a very compact and >> durable way IMHO to carry around a fire/theft backup, and safe >> since it's password-protected. >> >> Now to the incremental part. The technique I've just tried for the >> first time is to plug in the thumb drive (J:), go to command mode, >> in C: go to My Documents, in J: go to the corresponding >> directory, then in C: enter >> >> XCOPY *.* J: /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K >> >> Benefits: fast as h___, three and a half minutes to deal with just >> over 8 Gby; and doesn't bother me with "do you really want to >> change this file?". (Today's test found 41 files to copy out of >> 5698.) Further benefit, thumb drive is available to show friends >> things, demonstrate, share, load things from them, all without >> presence of Acronis. >> >> Drawback, possibly, doesn't ask me "do you really want to >> change this file?". > *** xcopy.exe does not produce any such message. What does > *** it really say? > *** If you're referring to the "replace" prompt - your "/Y" switch > *** takes care of it. > >> Further drawback, have to enter the commands >> correctly -- I need to get this into a batch file. > *** OK, put it into a batch file and don't forget to specify both > *** the source and the target drive and folder! > @echo off > XCOPY "c:\My Documents\Anthony\*.*" J:\ /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K > > >> I don't imagine I'm the first to hit on this technique -- any >> comments or cautions? >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> A postscript: incremental backups save changes and copy new >> data, but AFAIK they don't copy to the backup the absence of >> data that have been deleted. If you back up incrementally >> enough times, you're slowly going to accumulate a collection >> of things in the backup that shouldn't be there yet would be >> restored if you use the original backup and all its increments >> to restore a system. Does any backup software cure this >> problem? > > Use robocopy.exe. It has switches that will create a mirror of the source > at the target location. You can download it from here: > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=9D467A69-57FF-4AE7-96EE-B18C4790CFFD&displaylang=en > Right, I will indeed create a batch file. Agreed, xcopy doesn't ask the kind of question I indicated. I was contrasting xcopy (with prompting off) with copy-and-paste, which does ask about replacing existing files in general, read-only files in particular, and system files again in particular. Thanks for the pointer to robocopy. It looks as though it has an impressive list of command line options. With Acronis I have hardly ever considered an incremental backup, always making complete images.
Guest Anthony Buckland Posted August 26, 2008 Posted August 26, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY "Bob Harris" <rharris270[sPAM]@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e2B%23Wd8BJHA.1224@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >I have been using the XCOPY command in a batch file for years to backup >personal files. > > Open NOTEPAD and type the variation of the XCOPY command you like. You > may add any number of lines beginning with "REM", without the quotes, as > comments. Save, exit NOTEPAD, then rename with extension "BAT". > Double-click on the BAT file to run it. Or, make a desktop short-cut, and > just press that button. Right, I intend to, but wanted to see any negative feedback first. I've written various batch files, and fiddled with others. I go back to the days when fiddling with AUTOEXEC (and CONFIG.SYS) was a routine thing to have to do. For some reason, though, I'd never got into XCOPY much before. > > You might also want to use the /S option, to recursively copy > subdirectories. I figured /E would be a better choice, since it copies empty directories also. The help file indicates /E is equivalent to /S /E. Why copy empty directories? Because their emptiness might be only a temporary circumstance, and maybe there's a piece of software that expects some of them to be there, but doesn't have the smarts to create them. > > And, there is an option /EXCLUDE:excludefile.txt, where "excludefile.txt" > is a simple text file that contains files and/or directories not to copy. > "excludefile.txt" is not a special name; it could just as well be called > "xxx.txt". The format of the exclude file is one line per file or > directory, such as: > > \RECYCLED\ > \SYSTEM VOLUME INFORMATION\ > \TEMP\ > *.BAK Understood. I omitted it since it was My Documents I was copying, and I can't offhand think of any directories in there that might not in principle at least have an update to copy. > > ... Thanks for the fast and helpful response.
Guest Twayne Posted August 27, 2008 Posted August 27, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY > I've been working on a supplementary form of backup (other than > my more-or-less regular backups with Acronis True Image of my > entire C: partition). The volatile part of my file system is My > Documents, into which I've incorporated my Outlook Express > storage files and my Address Book. So I've backed this up by > straight copying to a thumb drive, which is a very compact and > durable way IMHO to carry around a fire/theft backup, and safe > since it's password-protected. > > Now to the incremental part. The technique I've just tried for the > first time is to plug in the thumb drive (J:), go to command mode, > in C: go to My Documents, in J: go to the corresponding > directory, then in C: enter > > XCOPY *.* J: /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K > > Benefits: fast as h___, three and a half minutes to deal with just > over 8 Gby; and doesn't bother me with "do you really want to > change this file?". (Today's test found 41 files to copy out of > 5698.) Further benefit, thumb drive is available to show friends > things, demonstrate, share, load things from them, all without > presence of Acronis. > > Drawback, possibly, doesn't ask me "do you really want to > change this file?". Further drawback, have to enter the commands > correctly -- I need to get this into a batch file. > > I don't imagine I'm the first to hit on this technique -- any > comments or cautions? > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > A postscript: incremental backups save changes and copy new > data, but AFAIK they don't copy to the backup the absence of > data that have been deleted. If you back up incrementally > enough times, you're slowly going to accumulate a collection > of things in the backup that shouldn't be there yet would be > restored if you use the original backup and all its increments > to restore a system. Does any backup software cure this > problem? Nope, that's a decent methodology and works well for many. Too bad it can't handle system files too<g>, but ... Xcopy bases what it will copy (or not) on the status of the Archive bit on a file. On, copy; off, skip. So it works pretty well for incremental backups. If you're up to the task, there's an even more powerful extended version of xcopy called XXCopy (found ta xxcopy.com logically enough), it's free, uses all the same syntax xcopy has and then goes on to add a kajillion other valuable and useful features such as progress bars and many other things xcopy is missing. It's list of switches is incredibly long though; you don't memorize them, you just research them and write your batches accordingly<g>. Oh, it's free or pay and the pay version is cheap at that. Great documentation too. I use it instead of xcopy for my "lotsa changes" & "incredibly important" backups rather than waiting for my imaging program to process them; it's sort of a versioning system for me on top of backup. Every file gets the date/time prepended to it for that purpose. That way they're always handy on a disk: The batch file now even calculates the size of the backups and alerts me when it's time to burn them to a DVD and start re-collecting them. Either program, a batch file is definitely the way to execute them. Then make an icon for it and just trigger it from windows desktop when you need to. Personally I don't really see any drawbacks or cons to either program if they fit the bill for what needs to be done. At first I had a problem in that the backup would get too big for a cd, so I switched to DVD, and then had to add the little alert to let me know the backup was getting too big for a DVD. XXCopy made that easier, too. I'm looking into a dual layer DVD right now so the saga continues<G>. On a good day I'll run it up to a dozen or so times, depending. HTH Twayne
Guest Twayne Posted August 27, 2008 Posted August 27, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY > "Pegasus (MVP)" <I.can@fly.com.oz> wrote in message > news:%23xvzmd8BJHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> See below. >> >> "Anthony Buckland" <anthonybucklandnospam@telus.net> wrote in message >> news:OzQ%23rW8BJHA.4576@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>> I've been working on a supplementary form of backup (other than >>> my more-or-less regular backups with Acronis True Image of my >>> entire C: partition). The volatile part of my file system is My >>> Documents, into which I've incorporated my Outlook Express >>> storage files and my Address Book. So I've backed this up by >>> straight copying to a thumb drive, which is a very compact and >>> durable way IMHO to carry around a fire/theft backup, and safe >>> since it's password-protected. >>> >>> Now to the incremental part. The technique I've just tried for the >>> first time is to plug in the thumb drive (J:), go to command mode, >>> in C: go to My Documents, in J: go to the corresponding >>> directory, then in C: enter >>> >>> XCOPY *.* J: /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K >>> >>> Benefits: fast as h___, three and a half minutes to deal with just >>> over 8 Gby; and doesn't bother me with "do you really want to >>> change this file?". (Today's test found 41 files to copy out of >>> 5698.) Further benefit, thumb drive is available to show friends >>> things, demonstrate, share, load things from them, all without >>> presence of Acronis. >>> >>> Drawback, possibly, doesn't ask me "do you really want to >>> change this file?". >> *** xcopy.exe does not produce any such message. What does >> *** it really say? >> *** If you're referring to the "replace" prompt - your "/Y" switch >> *** takes care of it. >> >>> Further drawback, have to enter the commands >>> correctly -- I need to get this into a batch file. >> *** OK, put it into a batch file and don't forget to specify both >> *** the source and the target drive and folder! >> @echo off >> XCOPY "c:\My Documents\Anthony\*.*" J:\ /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K >> >> >>> I don't imagine I'm the first to hit on this technique -- any >>> comments or cautions? >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> A postscript: incremental backups save changes and copy new >>> data, but AFAIK they don't copy to the backup the absence of >>> data that have been deleted. If you back up incrementally >>> enough times, you're slowly going to accumulate a collection >>> of things in the backup that shouldn't be there yet would be >>> restored if you use the original backup and all its increments >>> to restore a system. Does any backup software cure this >>> problem? >> >> Use robocopy.exe. It has switches that will create a mirror of the >> source at the target location. You can download it from here: >> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=9D467A69-57FF-4AE7-96EE-B18C4790CFFD&displaylang=en >> > > Right, I will indeed create a batch file. > > Agreed, xcopy doesn't ask the kind of question I indicated. I was > contrasting > xcopy (with prompting off) with copy-and-paste, which does ask about > replacing > existing files in general, read-only files in particular, and system > files again in > particular. One note: Neither xcopy, xxcopy, robocopy, etc., AFAIK are capable of copying files that are IN USE, so be very careful using them to back up anything system related. The imaging software does it by using the Shadow Copy Services, but few other programs use that service. I guess that's a downside; if you have the errors turned off and set to just continue, you'll never know when it misses copying a file unless you also create/examine the logs. Many system files are "in use" at all times, others come and go depending on what you're doing, have been doing, may do<g>. So you should use error checking as opposed to just turning off the messages to the screen and auto-continues. So, it's definitely NOT a system disk backup system. Stick with your images for that. HTH > > Thanks for the pointer to robocopy. It looks as though it has an > impressive list of command line options. With Acronis I have hardly > ever considered an incremental backup, always making complete images.
Guest Anthony Buckland Posted August 27, 2008 Posted August 27, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message news:uYLGHpGCJHA.4316@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... ... > One note: Neither xcopy, xxcopy, robocopy, etc., AFAIK are capable of > copying files that are IN USE, so be very careful using them to back up > anything system related. The imaging software does it by using the Shadow > Copy Services, but few other programs use that service. > I guess that's a downside; if you have the errors turned off and set to > just continue, you'll never know when it misses copying a file unless you > also create/examine the logs. Many system files are "in use" at all > times, others come and go depending on what you're doing, have been doing, > may do<g>. > So you should use error checking as opposed to just turning off the > messages to the screen and auto-continues. So, it's definitely NOT a > system disk backup system. Stick with your images for that. > ... Thanks for that pointer. I'm using XCOPY only for My Documents, and with nothing running except the usual collection of system processes plus ZoneAlarm. I don't have automatic mail reception turned on, so I wouldn't expect even my Inbox (as noted earlier, I moved my Outlook Express store to My Documents, and in my testing so far I've noticed that every recently changed OE file does in fact get copied by XCOPY) to be in use. In the event that some My Documents file failed to get copied, the worst that would happen would be that a previous version would remain, unchanged, on the thumb drive. But I agree, XCOPY is a technique not to be used willy-nilly for general backup with errors not being flagged. (One thing that would tend to save me from even trying to do that is that the thumb drive has yet to be made that would hold every file in my C: partition :) ) file
Guest Anthony Buckland Posted August 27, 2008 Posted August 27, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY "Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message news:OXrJZlGCJHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> I've been working on a supplementary form of backup (other than >> my more-or-less regular backups with Acronis True Image of my >> entire C: partition). The volatile part of my file system is My >> Documents, into which I've incorporated my Outlook Express >> storage files and my Address Book. So I've backed this up by >> straight copying to a thumb drive, which is a very compact and >> durable way IMHO to carry around a fire/theft backup, and safe >> since it's password-protected. >> >> Now to the incremental part. The technique I've just tried for the >> first time is to plug in the thumb drive (J:), go to command mode, >> in C: go to My Documents, in J: go to the corresponding >> directory, then in C: enter >> >> XCOPY *.* J: /D /E /C /Q /H /R /Y /K >> >> Benefits: fast as h___, three and a half minutes to deal with just >> over 8 Gby; and doesn't bother me with "do you really want to >> change this file?". (Today's test found 41 files to copy out of >> 5698.) Further benefit, thumb drive is available to show friends >> things, demonstrate, share, load things from them, all without >> presence of Acronis. >> >> Drawback, possibly, doesn't ask me "do you really want to >> change this file?". Further drawback, have to enter the commands >> correctly -- I need to get this into a batch file. >> >> I don't imagine I'm the first to hit on this technique -- any >> comments or cautions? >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> A postscript: incremental backups save changes and copy new >> data, but AFAIK they don't copy to the backup the absence of >> data that have been deleted. If you back up incrementally >> enough times, you're slowly going to accumulate a collection >> of things in the backup that shouldn't be there yet would be >> restored if you use the original backup and all its increments >> to restore a system. Does any backup software cure this >> problem? > > Nope, that's a decent methodology and works well for many. Too bad it > can't handle system files too<g>, but ... > > Xcopy bases what it will copy (or not) on the status of the Archive bit on > a file. On, copy; off, skip. So it works pretty well for incremental > backups. > > If you're up to the task, there's an even more powerful extended version > of xcopy called XXCopy (found ta xxcopy.com logically enough), it's free, > uses all the same syntax xcopy has and then goes on to add a kajillion > other valuable and useful features such as progress bars and many other > things xcopy is missing. It's list of switches is incredibly long though; > you don't memorize them, you just research them and write your batches > accordingly<g>. Oh, it's free or pay and the pay version is cheap at > that. Great documentation too. > I use it instead of xcopy for my "lotsa changes" & "incredibly > important" backups rather than waiting for my imaging program to process > them; it's sort of a versioning system for me on top of backup. Every > file gets the date/time prepended to it for that purpose. That way > they're always handy on a disk: The batch file now even calculates the > size of the backups and alerts me when it's time to burn them to a DVD and > start re-collecting them. > > Either program, a batch file is definitely the way to execute them. Then > make an icon for it and just trigger it from windows desktop when you need > to. > > Personally I don't really see any drawbacks or cons to either program if > they fit the bill for what needs to be done. At first I had a problem in > that the backup would get too big for a cd, so I switched to DVD, and then > had to add the little alert to let me know the backup was getting too big > for a DVD. XXCopy made that easier, too. I'm looking into a dual layer > DVD right now so the saga continues<G>. On a good day I'll run it up to a > dozen or so times, depending. > > HTH > > Twayne > Thanks, that's very useful information.
Guest Pegasus \(MVP\) Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY "Anthony Buckland" <anthonybucklandnospam@telus.net> wrote in message news:us1Y6TJCJHA.528@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > <snip> > But I agree, XCOPY is a technique not to be used willy-nilly for > general backup with errors not being flagged. (One thing that > would tend to save me from even trying to do that is that the thumb > drive has yet to be made that would hold every file in my > C: partition :) ) > file It is up to you to flag or not to flag errors under xcopy.exe. The following code snippets will give you a full report: xcopy "Source Folder" "Target Folder" 1>c:\copy.log 2>c:\error.log xcopy "Source Folder" "Target Folder" 1>c:\copy.log 2>&1 When backing up files with an automatic process then it is mandatory to examine the backup log regularly, e.g. once every week. Without this examination the process cannot be relied upon.
Guest Leythos Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 Re: Incremental backing up with XCOPY In article <eKkpj6MCJHA.4884@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>, I.can@fly.com.oz says... > > "Anthony Buckland" <anthonybucklandnospam@telus.net> wrote in message > news:us1Y6TJCJHA.528@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > > > <snip> > > But I agree, XCOPY is a technique not to be used willy-nilly for > > general backup with errors not being flagged. (One thing that > > would tend to save me from even trying to do that is that the thumb > > drive has yet to be made that would hold every file in my > > C: partition :) ) > > file > > It is up to you to flag or not to flag errors under xcopy.exe. The > following code snippets will give you a full report: > > xcopy "Source Folder" "Target Folder" 1>c:\copy.log 2>c:\error.log > xcopy "Source Folder" "Target Folder" 1>c:\copy.log 2>&1 > > When backing up files with an automatic process then it is > mandatory to examine the backup log regularly, e.g. once > every week. Without this examination the process cannot > be relied upon. You should use ROBOCOPY, a much better copy product - it's free from Microsoft and it has retries x times, delays for retries, extensive log information, and it can actually mirror a folder to another location, deleting any extra files at the destination. -- - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist" spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
Recommended Posts