rsync - Jun 2009 - difference between --no-implied-dir abd --keep-dirlinks ?

Hi,

I have gone through the rsync documentation and also tested same both
--no-implied-dir and --keep-dirlinks options.  My question is what is the
difference between these options in below scenario?

I have /foo/bar is the symlink to /foo/baz at source and same directory
structure with symlink is there at destination. When I sync the data from
/foo/bar/* with --relative option specified, I am ending with losing symlink
at destination. The rsync replaces symlink (/foo/bar -> /foo/baz) with
/foo/bar directory and synch data into it rather than synching it to
/foo/baz/. When I read rsync documentation and used either of
--keep-dirlinks or --no-implied-dir option, everything works as expected.

Jignesh
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:33:34AM +0530, Jignesh Shah
wrote:
> I have gone through the rsync documentation and also tested same both
> --no-implied-dir and --keep-dirlinks options.  My question is what is the
> difference between these options in below scenario?
Implied directories are those that are above the transfer area but
included as a part of the path due to the use of -R (--relative).  By
default all implied directories get sent with their directory
attributes, and the destination is forced to match that.  If you want
the implied paths to differ, --no-implied-dir will leave them alone.

Using --keep-dirlinks also affects the transfer area, so that you can
put a symlink to a directory anyplace that the sender has a dir.

..wayne..