[PATCH] Batch-mode rewrite
c.shoemaker at cox.net
Mon Jul 19 21:35:24 GMT 2004
On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 08:58:43PM -0700, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 06:20:59PM -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 05:25:18PM -0700, Wayne Davison wrote:
> > > So, perhaps we should go ahead and save off the exclude list in the
> > > batch file and force read_batch mode to read them?
> > I'm leaning in this direction.
> I was too until I realized that, in the haste of my last message, I
> had made a mistake about the excludes being needed to limit the dirs,
> symlinks, and devices. Of course these items were already elided from
> the list the sender sent us, so the only effect the excludes have at
> --read-batch time is to limit what gets deleted by --delete.
> So, with that in mind, I think it would be more flexible to tell the
> user that they can just drop the include/exclude options unless they
> want to use --delete and limit what get deleted. We can have the
> writing of the BATCH.sh file (which I renamed from BATCH.rsync_argvs)
> automatically dump the exclude options if --delete wasn't specified
> (or if --delete-excluded was).
Ok, I hadn't been paying close attention to the various delete and
exclude features, but I think we're on the same page now. If I
understand correctly, there's no reason to save the list into the BATCH
file. It only needs be in BATCH.sh. (I'm glad the 'rsync_argvs' is gone.)
I'm not sure if it's worth it to exclude the arguments (from BATCH.sh)
when they're not needed. It might be easier to always dump them. Is
there much performance impact specifying --excludes when they won't be
More information about the rsync