question about 2.6.3pre2's --link-by-hash behaviour
paul at debian.org
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 debian.org> 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 user.group 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:
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.
More information about the rsync