On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 04:02:18PM -0700, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 03:18:39PM -0700, William D. Tallman wrote:
> > My question is this: do I need to continue to use --size-only, or has
> > the first rsync backup run put time stamps on all files?
>
> You can drop the --size-o
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 12:44:11AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> However, after defining the missing flags in rsync.h I still get the
> following errors:
There were a bunch of old code idioms in that patch due to my inability
to compile file-flags on my systems. I kluged something together
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 07:19:58PM -0700, Barry Robison wrote:
> However this runs the risk of any files created locally during the
> length of the first rsync being deleted.
For a two-way sync, the "unison" tool is usually a better solution. Or,
adding a saved list a files with rsync lets the to
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 03:18:39PM -0700, William D. Tallman wrote:
> My question is this: do I need to continue to use --size-only, or has
> the first rsync backup run put time stamps on all files?
You can drop the --size-only option after that first use with the -t
option, because rsync will ha
On 3/30/07, William D. Tallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've now got scripts that correctly backup all my primary partitions to a
second drive. The original problem was that I copied them over without
a time stamp, so that the first rsync run found no timestamps and wanted
to copy them all ove
I've now got scripts that correctly backup all my primary partitions to a
second drive. The original problem was that I copied them over without
a time stamp, so that the first rsync run found no timestamps and wanted
to copy them all over again. So I used:
'rsync -r -t -v --size-only $
