![]() ![]() If /C forces Abort, Retry, Fail to be ignored then it would be useless for flagging errors caused by a hardware problem like a bad disk sector. You are right Michael, the 'what' wasn't addressed and this forced me to read Mikes post properly. The only problem I've found with RoboCopy (W2K and XP), is that they don't handle DST time shifts well, and that will force a differential/mirror copy to copy all files two times a year. I don't know if there's a correspondingly newer RoboCopy for the Vista Resource Kit (nor Windows 7). The RoboCopy from the XP Resource Kit need XP to run (of course). Any alternatives? There is RSync - but that's LINUX). ![]() It has even more features, features you'll want after using RoboCopy for a while but didn't know you needed without RoboCopy knowledge (or a similar program. If you can, you should use the RoboCopy that came with the XP Resource Kit. It sets out to do major unattended copy jobs. It is fault tolerant - but only if you wish it to be - and you can make it report errors as they occur too. But you need minimum W2K to make it work.īeing console based, RoboCopy can be seen as a supercharged XCOPY replacement that does a lot more than XCOPY ever did. ![]() If you are in control of the PCs in question, you should definately take a look at RoboCopy, a utility MS first offered with the W2K Resource Kit.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |