question about 2.6.3pre2's --link-by-hash behaviour

Paul Slootman paul at
Thu Sep 23 14:14:27 GMT 2004

On Wed 22 Sep 2004, Erik Jan Tromp wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 13:21:31 +0200
> Paul Slootman <paul at> wrote:
> > > I had hoped to use it both for my rotating backups & for my (unofficial)
> > > slackware mirror.
> > 
> > Hmmm... For a slackware mirror I expect that it would be fine.
> To my eyes, a mirror implies a duplicate fileset indistinguishable from the original. Having files show up with different modes & dates - due, in this case, to the sort order of the file list & the mode/date of the first file used for linking by hash - doesn't fit that scenario. Backups are even more sensitive as information _must_ be retained.

If a mirror of a distribution has different attributes for files that
are the same in contents, I'd say that mirror is buggy.... That's why I
qualified my response with "For a slackware mirror".
I agree that for general use, this is not useful.

> > I tried downloading the patch from the web cvs, but I got this:
> > 
> >     Error: Unexpected output from cvs co: cvs [checkout aborted]:
> >     Absolute module reference invalid:
> >     `/rsync/patches/link-by-hash.diff'
> > 
> >     Check whether the directory /cvsroot/CVSROOT exists and the script
> >     has write-access to the CVSROOT/history file if it exists.  The
> >     script needs to place lock files in the directory the file is in as
> >     well. 
> An alternative would be to use:
> rsync://

Unfortunately that seems to have tabs expanded, and at one point a line
was wrapped. However I managed to apply the patch by hand now.

Paul Slootman

More information about the rsync mailing list