On 4/25/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have noticed an anomaly with symbolic links.
umask 027
mkdir folder1
echo 'hello world' > folder1/file1
cd folder1
ln -s file1 softfile1
rsync -a ../folder1/ ../folder2/
ls -lF ../folder*
../folder1:
total 16
-rw-r- 1 alan alan
I'm sorry, I completely glossed over the -u and -b in your original
email. I take back what I said and agree it is a bug. I can reproduce
what you saw:
mkdir foo bar
echo hey >foo/file1
ln -s file1 foo/file2
sleep 1
echo there >bar/file1
echo guy >bar/file2
ls -l foo b
Personally I don't see why see why replacing a file with a symbolic
link is any more dangerous than replacing it with a different file.
Doesn't it back up the file if you use the --backup option? If you use
the --update option rsync shouldn't replace any file or symlink that is
newer than the eith
I don't see any option that works. My problem is not
how it copies the links; it is that rsync will delete
a regular file and replace it with the symlink when
the file is newer than the symlink. The file is
always erased with no backup. This seems wrong.
Basically I use rysnc to keep files on
That's not a bug, it's a feature. Note that the -a option is equivalent
to -rlptgoD; replace it with all but the "l" and then look through the
different options with the word "link" in it in the man page and see if
one of them does what you want.
- Dave Dykstra
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 03:19:34PM
I'm not certain what result you want, but rsync will do your bidding. --copy-links
makes it grab the file the link points to, instead of creating the link,
--copy-unsafe-links does the same, including for links that point OUTSIDE of the
directory tree
you were looking at. --safe-links preven
