Personally I don't see why see why replacing a file with a symbolic link is any more dangerous than replacing it with a different file. Doesn't it back up the file if you use the --backup option? If you use the --update option rsync shouldn't replace any file or symlink that is newer than the either that is older, will that help?
- Dave On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 09:19:44PM -0800, Peter Sturdza wrote: > > I don't see any option that works. My problem is not > how it copies the links; it is that rsync will delete > a regular file and replace it with the symlink when > the file is newer than the symlink. The file is > always erased with no backup. This seems wrong. > > Basically I use rysnc to keep files on two different > computers up to date. Say I replace a symlink on one > computer with a file by the same name (perhaps because > I want to make a small change to this file but not > change the file that is being referred to by the > symlink), then rsync the two computers. In this case, > rsync will always erase the updated file and replace > it with the older symlink. > > In general, I still do want to preserve symlinks and > use option -l, however it seems dangerous for a > symlink to overwrite a regular file without backups or > regard to timestamps. > > This happens on Linux with rsync version 2.5.5. > > Peter > > --- Dave Dykstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's not a bug, it's a feature. Note that the -a > > option is equivalent > > to -rlptgoD; replace it with all but the "l" and > > then look through the > > different options with the word "link" in it in the > > man page and see if > > one of them does what you want. > > > > - Dave Dykstra > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
