Kenneth Loafman wrote: > Peter Schuller wrote: >>>> is a correct transcribation of the previous version whichi called >>>> copy_raw() if the file was a manifest. >>> In the normal course of processing the difference between manifest and >>> sigtar are necessary in the local side. The manifest is not compressed >>> and the sigtar is, so the way I had it was correct. >>> >>> On the remote side, it's either encrypted or gzipped. I'll review your >>> changes and see if there are any problems. >> Hopefully it's still correct but expressed another way; I'm just not >> sure about it. >> >> However I also realized sometime yesterday, though I didn't bother >> posting until LP's mail queue got flushed, that the "spurious" files >> likely are there sort of by design given the checkpoint/restart >> logic. So I'm not sure whether the fix to remove them makes sense. I >> probably won't have much time to look into it again until next weekend >> though. >> >> In any case, I do think that the recent improvements in archive >> handling in 6.x are going to be very nice, and I particularly value >> the ability to 'synchronize' the archive. In my case also in removal >> of files, to avoid old "cruft" accumulating. But of course I don't >> want to disable the checkpoint/restart feature either. > > One reason I did not try to remove spurious files on the local side is > that there just might be a missing sigtar file on the remote even though > we don't detect it at the moment. Also, the spurious files might just > be partial backup files and we would not want to delete those until > later. I'd leave any pr.partial files you find. > > So, you'll still need most of the code I had, but refactored to have the > resolve_basename() function split out. On the remote side the correct > suffix is give by get_suffix(globals.encryption, not globals.encryption) > and mine was wrong, so you need to fix that. > > I've got some time and would like to finish your work and get this > released soon so that we have a working version out there.
I merged your changes in to the trunk and fixed a few things. On the local side we still need to look at pr.manifest to decide whether to compress or not. I made sure not to include any pr.partial files in the original list of files, nor any non-duplicity files, just in case. As far as I can tell from a few test cases, its all working as it should. If you've got time, take a look and test it out. I'll be adding some unittest cases. ...Ken _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~duplicity-team Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~duplicity-team More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
