On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, D Andrew Reynhout wrote: > Yes, I'm working on a proper AppleDouble format next.
Great, this is good news! I think rsync and the Mac community has been sorely missing this for some time. > It requires a combination of the two file handling procedures I've > added so far, which either: a) send a file under a newly composed > filename, or b) synthesize a "faux file" from filesystem metadata, > and send that under a composed filename, but not both. > > The next step is to put the two together and send a single extra > file to the destination. Someone has offered to work on coding the > reverse process, so hopefully it will all come together shortly. So I take it that if either of the file data, the resource fork, or the metadata change, that the file will be transferred? > I'll also update the patch to 2.6.3pre1. > > Interestingly, all of the AppleDouble implementations I've been > reading ignore the Finder Comments field. Some of them (e.g. > Mozilla) set up an entry for the data, but they never actually > put it in. I guess users don't care about the Comments field. There's some dormant Mac code in the mpack distribution to handle "simple applesingle/appledouble encoding/decoding" (macfile.c) that appears to handle comments. According to the release notes, the Mac code probably doesn't compile anymore, but maybe it can be reworked. http://ftp.andrew.cmu.edu/pub/mpack/mpack-1.6.tar.gz > On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 12:15:48PM -1000, Julian Cowley wrote: > > Any reason this couldn't use the same convention that Apple > > uses on UFS partitions? > -- In the Year 2000 (tm)... "I will convert to Judasism and change my trademark Fa Shizzle My Nizzle to Sheiztle Fa Zeitzel." -- Snoop Dog -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
