Copying EAs and ACLs
bescoto at stanford.edu
Mon Mar 10 17:31:16 EST 2003
>>>>> "JWS" == jw schultz <jw at pegasys.ws>
>>>>> wrote the following on Sun, 9 Mar 2003 18:25:47 -0800
JWS> What i do expect for the next few years is that almost all
JWS> files will have no EAs and that less than half will have ACLs.
JWS> I do however expect that ACL usage will affect entire trees
JWS> (setfacl -R -m) rather than scattered files.
Yes, this sounds likely to me also. If so, it doesn't seem very
important to apply the rsync algorithm to the contents of the EAs/ACLs
- updating them as a whole if there is any change shouldn't be too
Also, if the ACL/EA information needs to be stored separately (because
for instance the target system doesn't have ACL/EA capability), does
it seem better then to use one big file, instead of, for instance, a
whole tree of smaller files? I was thinking that maybe the file's
format could be the same as the (gzipped) output of getfattr/getfacl
--recursive. That would make things more compatible, but may be
slightly inefficient compared to some other format. Also there may be
no point if the getf[attr/acl] format is likely to change soon.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 229 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/attachments/20030309/9d6d8d40/attachment.bin
More information about the rsync