specifying a list of files to transfer

[jw schultz]

On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 10:03:33AM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 07:57:48PM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
> > with the -r or -a options does this [recurse] on
> > directories in the --files-from list?
> 
> Yes, it treats them like command-line args with the following two
> exceptions:  if -r is not specified, we WILL create an explicitly named
> directory (but not send its contents), if -R is specified, we do NOT
> create implied directories (which was your next question).  This latter
> exception means that we currently require the user to ensure that the
> destination directory tree is valid (which could be done once with a
> separate rsync --files-from run that didn't use -r and specified all
> the dirs that we needed to ensure exist).  If this turns out to be too
> much of a hassle, perhaps a new option named --implied-dirs could be
> added to have rsync do its normal -R dir handling.

Plus the third difference, that relative paths in the
files-from list are relative to the tree, not to the current
directory.

We may well want the --implied-dirs option or some logic to
created it.  If you don't have -r (or -a) you need to have
all the intermediate dirs listed.  If you do have -r listing
intermediate dirs efectively disables the file list.

I'm not sure i like that.  I'm inclined to think the file-list
should disable recoursion.  Perhaps [fighting resistance of
yuck] recoursion would have to be specified explicitly after
the --file-list.  I hate sequence sensitive options but
but requiring users to remember -lptgoD instead of -a may be
worse.

You seem to see the files-from as a way of replacing
command-line args where i see it as a way of replacing the
tree scan.  However, if we can pin down the semantics i
think we can acheive both ends.


-- 
________________________________________________________________
	J.W. Schultz            Pegasystems Technologies
	email address:		jw at pegasys.ws

		Remember Cernan and Schmitt