Re: hdup 2.0.1 argggg

On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 20:30 +0100, Miek Gieben wrote:
> [On 17 Nov, @ 19:58, Graham wrote in "Re: [hdup-user] hdup 2.0.1 arg ..."]
> > > all yourself is a big job.
> > 
> > Miek, as a grateful user of hdup I'm not about to impugn your ability to
> > write good code, but sticking with a widely-used external implementation
> > of tar (GNU, star, pax, whatever...) means that a large chunk of the
> 
> I indeed found Pax to be a suitable replacement for tar. I'm already
> implementing a pax based hdup, which will be hdup 2.0.2
> 
> Prob. before the end of the week I will be able to re-release hdup2, 
> with pax. I Hope :)


Sounds great.  Thanks, as always, for all your work on this.

Looking through the man pages, one potential limitation of pax vis-a-vis
tar is that tar --listed-incremental is at least supposed to do the
right thing in cases where a file or directory has been moved, whereas
simply comparing timestamps can fail to backup files that are in new
places (but where the file itself has not been modified).

Ie, if I move /opt to /foo, then /foo/fileX ought to be backed up on the
next run even though it may not have been modified for a year.  I don't
know of a way to catch this without keeping a list of what files were
backed up "last time".  If pax doesn't have that ability, you may want
to implement it within hdup.

Bng

-- 
Boris Goldowsky <boris-FrUbXkNCsVf2fBVCVOL8/[email protected]>