On Sun 06 Mar 2011, hanj wrote:
> I created a entirely new vault, and backups are working fine with that
> new backup vault.
The backups would have worked fine with the existing vault, apart from
downloading all the files with changed metadata once -- just like you
did by creating the new backup
On Sun 06 Mar 2011, Dale Amon wrote:
>
> Oh futz. Hard links don't allow a new directory entry with different
> metadata. I had not thought that all the way through.
I get a sense of misunderstanding here about how files, directories and
inodes really work, so I'll volunteer some info now :)
An
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 12:47:23PM +0100, Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Sun 06 Mar 2011, Dale Amon wrote:
> >
> > Oh futz. Hard links don't allow a new directory entry with different
> > metadata. I had not thought that all the way through.
>
> I get a sense of misunderstanding here about how files,
On Mon 07 Mar 2011, Dale Amon wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 12:47:23PM +0100, Paul Slootman wrote:
> > On Sun 06 Mar 2011, Dale Amon wrote:
> > >
> > > Oh futz. Hard links don't allow a new directory entry with different
> > > metadata. I had not thought that all the way through.
> >
> > I get
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 06:49:05PM +0100, Paul Slootman wrote:
> It's just that the phrase "new directory entry with different metadata"
> is so wrong :-)
Ah, but it is a true statement that hard link design doesn't
allow for multiple sources of meta data.
___
On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:40:04 +0100
Paul Slootman wrote:
> The backups would have worked fine with the existing vault, apart from
> downloading all the files with changed metadata once -- just like you
> did by creating the new backup vault.
I'm just concerned about the meta data. Like I mentioned
