Incremental backing up with XCOPY

[Guest Anthony Buckland]

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]

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 \(MVP\)]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 \(MVP\)]

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]

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)