Paul Slootman
Mon, 08 Feb 2010 02:20:08 -0800
On Sat 06 Feb 2010, grarpamp wrote: > > > >> Sure, these no-longer-present source files are not technically unlinked > >> from > >> your previous archives in the current run, but it can be MASSIVELY > >> confusing > >> and dangerous if you're a log watcher/reviewer looking for what has > >> changed. > > > > Only if you don't understand what's going on.
> Since it's not a documented caveat of using link-dest, and the user never sees > it in the -i output, I'm sure there are plenty of folks for which this > realization > would never occur until it's too late. Personally, I've never had the expectation that it would report files that aren't transferred but exist in the link-dest tree. > It's simply that rsync _can_ be made to do all this in one invocation. > Since it has to look at and consider all three of source, prior and current > anyways, it makes sense to enhance it with this printing capability. It only checks the link-dest trees for existence of the files to be transferred. It doesn't build a list of all files in all the specified link-dest trees (remember that you can pass any number of --link-dest arguments). It would make rsync quite a bit slower if it's forced to traverse those trees just for reporting whether a file doesn't exist anymore in the new tree. I suggest first creating a duplicate of the tree you now pass as link-dest via cp -al, and then running rsync without the --link-dest but with --delete, for your specific requirements. > I don't have much use for userfriendly bloated scripts like dirvish/etc. > Not to knock them, they're fine for those who use them. I just prefer > putting only what I need into my own along with adding other bits. Where's the bloat? It has a lot of sensible checks, and a perl script of 28k isn't that bad. At least it's a whole lot less overhead than forcing rsync to build a list of the files in the link-dest tree (admittedly dirvish builds the tree with find, but then only if asked). Rsync would then need an extra option to enable it to report such "deleted" files, because I sure don't need that nor do I need the extra overhead that encurs. And how do suggest it reports from which trees the file is "deleted"? Paul -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html