On 8/6/07, Buck Huppmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sorry to drag the other guys into this; they may no longer be interest-
> ed. for my part, getting rsync hacked up to fit into a tool-chain to
> suit my bidding was about as much ambition as i had. setting up this
> frep thing seems like Real Wo
On 7/30/07, Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Currently, I think the best option is to do a separate rsync run for
> each notification (or group of notifications arriving close in time).
> Write a little script that reads the inotifywait output [...]
I was going to hack together a script
On 8/5/07, Buck Huppmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i'm just worried that the code is gonna collapse under the weight of
> so many options at some point--sorta like Windows
That's a legitimate concern and one that I have thought about myself.
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "collapse".
On 8/5/07, Buck Huppmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GNU cpio
> (Debian 4.0/2.6-17) doesn't object to being treated so perversely. of
> course, you have to work around stdio buffering . . .
OK, so cpio appears to be a good option for continuous copying using a
single process. I personally would
On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 02:27:14PM -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> The current design of incremental recursion is that all of the source
> arguments or --files-from entries are loaded into the file list at the
> beginning but traversal of directories happens little by little. The
> key point is th
On 7/29/07, Buck Huppmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i may be reading the code incorrectly, but it seems that, if the
> --files-from option processing can be altered (or perhaps yet another
> option could be created [shudder]) to opt out of the de-duplicate pass
> and somebody hooked inotifywait
Way back,
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 08:12:30AM +, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 05:22:55PM -0500, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> > Specifically, I'm curious about what areas under the source
> > argument(s) are scanned at what time.
>
> All the args that the user supplies are scanned a
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 05:22:55PM -0500, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> Specifically, I'm curious about what areas under the source
> argument(s) are scanned at what time.
All the args that the user supplies are scanned at once, allowing them
to be unduplicated as they would be in a normal transfer. Th
On 12/28/06, Wayne Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For those that like to assist in the testing of rsync, the CVS version
now defaults to doing an incremental file-list scan when it is recursing
through the directories. [...]
- Would you care to explain how the scan works, or should I read
For those that like to assist in the testing of rsync, the CVS version
now defaults to doing an incremental file-list scan when it is recursing
through the directories. This avoids keeping the whole file list in
memory, and allows the transfer to start working on changed files before
it has comple
10 matches
Mail list logo
