On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 04:08:01PM -0500, Scott Mcdermott wrote: > Dave Dykstra on Thu 16/01 14:57 -0600: > > > > The patch from 2-1/2 years ago for changing copy-unsafe-links to > > > > follow unsafe links on the destination side also included > > > > essentially this patch. > > > > > > just to be clear, without using copy-unsafe-links, rsync still > > > copies absolute symlinks which point out of the source tree, > > > verbatim to the destination (even if it ends up dangling on the > > > destination), right? > > > > Right, with the -l or --links option (implied by -a). > > not to beat a dead horse, but copy-unsafe-links is certainly a misnomer. > I liked your follow-unsafe-links much better. Copying the links doesn't > really have much to do with following them, which is what the option > actually does...
Yeah, what it really means is copy-in the files pointed to by unsafe links, but follow-unsafe-links is better except that the name applies equally well to source and destination. I don't think it's worth changing the name unless functionality is also changed. - Dave -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
