Jeff,
I remember looking into this long ago, and I recall that fuse makes up its
own fake inode numbers, which creates exactly the problem you noticed -
hardlinked files don't show the same inode number. The Git issue you
mentioned reports that problem.
Craig
On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 8:52 PM <backu...@kosowsky.org> wrote:
> It seems like backuppc-fuse correctly lists the number of hard links
> for each file *but* the corresponding inodes are not numbered the
> same.
>
> For example:
>
> #Native file system
> ls -il /usr/bin/pigz /usr/bin/unpigz
> 564544 -rwxr-xr-x 2 root root 116944 Dec 27 2017 /usr/bin/pigz*
> 564544 -rwxr-xr-x 2 root root 116944 Dec 27 2017 /usr/bin/unpigz*
>
> #Backuppc-fuse version
> ls -il /mnt/backuppc/consult/root/{/usr/bin/pigz,/usr/bin/unpigz}
> 386328 -rwxr-xr-x 2 root root 116944 Dec 27 2017
> /mnt/backuppc/myhost/root/usr/bin/pigz*
> 827077 -rwxr-xr-x 2 root root 116944 Dec 27 2017
> /mnt/backuppc/myhost/root/usr/bin/unpigz*
>
> Is there any way to fix this???
>
> I couldn't find much on Google, but it seems like there is a low and a
> high level inode notion in fuse filesystems and that the low-level one
> has the right inode number. See:
> https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/79
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BackupPC-users mailing list
> BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
> Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
> Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
>
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
