On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 03:47:03PM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> If I then run it again, I get the following [a different hashed file]
I didn't see that in my just-run test. I did notice a problem with the
code not removing an existing destination file prior to trying to hard
link a hashed file i
The --link-by-hash patch is a bit defective, I think.
If I run the following command:
rsync --link-by-hash=/tmp/hash 192.168.1.1::mirrors/ps1 /tmp
I get the following output:
(1) linkname = /tmp/hash/0fb9ca1a/3cc6ec7f5a2de3a0235b585f/0
link-by-hash (new): "/tmp/ps1" -> "/tmp/hash/0fb9ca1a/3
One thing that the link-by-hash patch needs is an additional close();
without that, I quickly ran into "too many open files".
--- hashlink.c.old 2004-09-24 10:59:12.0 +0200
+++ hashlink.c 2004-09-24 10:59:20.0 +0200
@@ -280,6 +280,7 @@
}
On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 04:14:27PM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Wed 22 Sep 2004, Erik Jan Tromp wrote:
> > rsync://rsync.samba.org/ftp/unpacked/rsync/patches/link-by-hash.diff
>
> Unfortunately that seems to have tabs expanded, and at one point a
> line was wrapped.
The "unpacked" files are t
On Wed 22 Sep 2004, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 04:54:32AM -0400, Erik Jan Tromp wrote:
> > Are there plans to make --link-by-hash pay attention to file externals?
>
> The issue has come up before:
>
> http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2004-February/008630.html
>
> I don't
On Wed 22 Sep 2004, Erik Jan Tromp wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 13:21:31 +0200
> Paul Slootman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > I had hoped to use it both for my rotating backups & for my (unofficial)
> > > slackware mirror.
> >
> > Hmmm... For a slackware mirror I expect that it would be fine.
On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 04:54:32AM -0400, Erik Jan Tromp wrote:
> Are there plans to make --link-by-hash pay attention to file externals?
The issue has come up before:
http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2004-February/008630.html
I don't know of any plans for changing the --link-by-hash patch,
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 13:21:31 +0200
Paul Slootman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I had hoped to use it both for my rotating backups & for my (unofficial)
> > slackware mirror.
>
> Hmmm... For a slackware mirror I expect that it would be fine.
To my eyes, a mirror implies a duplicate fileset indis
On Wed 22 Sep 2004, Erik Jan Tromp wrote:
> I had noticed the --link-by-hash patch a short while back & decided it was time to
> experiment with it. Sadly, its behaviour is considerabely different from what I
> expected - to the point that I find it unusable in its current form. I had hoped to
I had noticed the --link-by-hash patch a short while back & decided it was time to
experiment with it. Sadly, its behaviour is considerabely different from what I
expected - to the point that I find it unusable in its current form. I had hoped to
use it both for my rotating backups & for my (uno
10 matches
Mail list logo
