Re: question about file mask options that claim to not allow pathnames

On 24/04/2021 23:53, imschmeg wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 23:30:00 +0200
> Denis Corbin <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> ...
>> Many options use masks. Some options, like --include and --exclude,
>> only apply it to the filename part of the file that is under
>> consideration. Some other options, like --exclude-delta-sig, --prune,
>> ... apply the mask to the whole path+filename.
> 
> OK - I think this is what had me confused.
> 
> That's unfortunate for me, as I was considering how to exclude a
> subdirectory tree from compression (because it contains only encrypted
> files), 

Don't those file have specific filenames or extension to flag they are
encrypted?

> but --exclude-compression only takes a filename mask.  I think
> this means that I either back that subtree up separately, or let dar
> waste time trying to compress those files.

I'm affraid you only have these options... There is a third feature that
could come to play, but it will not be of great use here: modify the
--mincompr option to not compress file smaller than an arbitrary size,
it would mean the encrypted files would be all small files and
unencrypted would be larger, which is unlikely

> 
>