On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:04:20 -0800
Wayne Davison wrote:
>
> The problem is that if you transfer from a filesystem that has
> nanoseconds to one that does not support it, rsync would consider
> most of the files to be constantly different, since the nanosecond
> values would only match if the sour
> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:04:20 -0800
> From: Wayne Davison
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Ingo Br=C3=BCckl
wrote:
> > On systems using nanoseconds differences should be taken into
> > consideration.
> The problem is that if you transfer from a filesystem that ha
On Wed 20 Jan 2016, Wayne Davison wrote:
> equal. One possible improvement would be to skip the nanosecond check if
> the destination file has a nanosecond value of 0. That could possibly be
> improved if we figure out if a particular device ID supports nanoseconds
> somehow. I have a potential
On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Ingo Brückl wrote:
> On systems using nanoseconds differences should be taken into
> consideration.
>
The problem is that if you transfer from a filesystem that has nanoseconds
to one that does not support it, rsync would consider most of the files to
be constant
On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 16:17:57 +0100
Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Wed 20 Jan 2016, Andrey Gursky wrote:
> >
> > I was just about to implement the same, since nanoseconds are taken
> > into account when transferring, thus making it obvious not to ignore
>
> Really? I thought the protocol only transmi
On Wed 20 Jan 2016, Andrey Gursky wrote:
>
> I was just about to implement the same, since nanoseconds are taken
> into account when transferring, thus making it obvious not to ignore
Really? I thought the protocol only transmits seconds.
Paul
--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid
On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:58:51 +0100
Ingo Brückl wrote:
> I wrote on Fri, 02 Jan 2015 16:02:27 +0100:
>
> > --- a/generator.c 2014-06-14 01:05:08.0 +0200
> > +++ b/generator.c 2015-01-02 15:50:30.0 +0100
> > @@ -588,7 +588,14 @@
> > if (ignore_times)
> >
I wrote on Fri, 02 Jan 2015 16:02:27 +0100:
> --- a/generator.c 2014-06-14 01:05:08.0 +0200
> +++ b/generator.c 2015-01-02 15:50:30.0 +0100
> @@ -588,7 +588,14 @@
> if (ignore_times)
> return 0;
> - return cmp_time(st->st_mtime, file->modt
Hi,
I obviously didn't think of --modify-window, so in order to not behave
erratically it should be at least:
--- a/generator.c 2014-06-14 01:05:08.0 +0200
+++ b/generator.c 2015-01-02 15:50:30.0 +0100
@@ -588,7 +588,14 @@
if (ignore_times)
retu
On systems using nanoseconds differences should be taken into consideration.
--- a/generator.c 2014-06-14 01:05:08.0 +0200
+++ b/generator.c 2014-12-25 11:19:54.0 +0100
@@ -588,7 +588,13 @@
if (ignore_times)
return 0;
- return cmp_time(st-
10 matches
Mail list logo
