[Bug 3168] --min-size cores in 2.6.5 and is completely missing in 2.6.6

samba-bugs at samba.org samba-bugs at samba.org
Fri Oct 14 11:50:39 GMT 2005


------- Additional Comments From foner-rsync-bugzilla at media.mit.edu  2005-10-14 04:50 -------
Obtw, when this gets reinstated, it would be -really nice- if one or the other
(but NOT BOTH) of --max-size or --min-size was an "OR EQUAL".  Right now, if I'm
trying to copy all files under one size to one place, and all files over one
size to another place, it's quite inconvenient not to miss the files that are
exactly on the boundary---instead of being able to use (say) --min-size=50M on
one run and --max-size=50M on the other, I have to say --min-size=49999999 and
--max-size=50000000 to be sure of not getting hit by the fencepost.  This is
error-prone at the very least (because I have to count digits precisely), and
worse if I want the powers-of-two behavior---and by the way, the manpage, even
for 2.6.6, is sloppy in mentioning the K, M, or G multipliers but in not
specifying whether those are human-readable [10^3] or machine [2^10]
multipliers---without reading the code, I have no idea.


Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

More information about the rsync mailing list