samba-bugs at samba.org
2010-Dec-12 18:22 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7862] New: hard-links and incremental recursion: unclear what happens
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7862 Summary: hard-links and incremental recursion: unclear what happens Product: rsync Version: 3.0.7 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: stepheng+samba at gildea.com QAContact: rsync-qa at samba.org I find the following sentence from the rsync 3.0.7 manual page discussion of --hard-links to be unclear: [incremental recursion] does not affect the accuracy of the transfer, just its efficiency. Does that mean ... 1) The transfer will be less efficient because rsync will transfer the contents of the file, only to discover later that the transfer was unnecessary, at which point it will toss the transferred data and hard-link the file, leaving the file system an accurate duplicate of the source, or ... 2) The file contents will be accurately copied into a new file, and you will lose the space efficiency of having the hard link. I read this as (1) and was happy, but the behavior seems to be (2). Whichever the implementation does, please clarify the documentation. -- 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.
samba-bugs at samba.org
2011-Jan-02 02:23 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7862] hard-links and incremental recursion: unclear what happens
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7862 wayned at samba.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED ------- Comment #1 from wayned at samba.org 2011-01-01 20:23 CST ------- I've clarified this a bit more in the latest docs (that the reading is indeed "1"). -- 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.
Maybe Matching Threads
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 6719] New: I/O error protection is broken w/ protocol 30 and incremental recursion
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 5266] New: Duplicate "not creating new directory" output w/ incremental recursion
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 5091] New: Incremental-recursive, list-only "rsync --delete" tries to clean out working dir
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 6362] New: --dry-run conflicts with --hard-links
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 5199] New: Exclusion of source arg ancestor short-circuits recursion