Ray Clark <webcl...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> Joerg, Thanks. As you (of all people) know, this area is quite a quagmire.
> I am confident that I don't have any sparse files, or if I do that they are
> small and loosing this property would not be a big impact. I have determined
> that none of the files have extended attributes or ACLs. Some are greater
> than 4GB and have long paths, but Sun TAR supports both if I include the E
> option. I am trusting that because it is recommended in the ZFS Admin Guide
> that it is my safest option with respect to any ZFS idiosyncrasies, given its
> limitations. If only those were documented!
Be careful! Sun tar creates non standard and thus non portable archives wich -E
Only star can read them.....
> My next problem is that I want to do an exhaustive file compare afterwards,
> and diff is not large-file aware.
This is what star implements
> I always wonder if or how these applications that run across every OS known
> to man such as star can possibly be able to have the right code to work
> around the idiosyncrasies and exploit the capabilities of all of those OS's.
> Should I consider star for the compare? For the copy? (Recognizing that it
> cannot do the ACLs, but I don't have those).
Star of course supports ACLs. Star does not yet support ZFS ACLs and this
is just a result of the fact that Sun did implement the same sort of design bugs
in the first attempt to suport ACLs in ZFS. Future star versions will support
ZFS ACLs as well.
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
