Looking through the current HTML manual I see:
"In addition, if you move a directory rather than copy it, the files in it do
not have their modification time (st_mtime) or their attribute change time
(st_ctime) changed. As a consequence, those files will probably not be backed
up by an Incremental or Differential backup which depend solely on these time
stamps. If you move a directory, and wish it to be properly backed up, it is
generally preferable to copy it, then delete the original."
and
"As noted above, if you move a directory rather than copy it, the files in it
do not have their modification time (st_mtime) or their attribute change time
(st_ctime) changed. As a consequence, those files will probably not be backed
up by an Incremental or Differential backup which depend solely on these time
stamps. If you move a directory, and wish it to be properly backed up, it is
generally preferable to copy it, then delete the original. Alternatively, you
can move the directory, then use the touch program to update the timestamps."
Why? Shouldn't bacula treat these as a newly created directory with new files
in it, and back them up? This is a big burden requiring people to remember
whether they should use cp or mv to move files. Besides this, and the disk
space issue, mv is a simple pointer redirection, and might be faster than a cp
depending on how high in the tree you are working on.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
