Ben Escoto wrote:
Yes, good point. I wonder if I add this though, then someone will
want various sorting options, someone will think -la displays too much
information, etc. Personally I'm happy with -la output. Can anyone
think of a better display/format, or of a more flexible way to do
this?
Too much information should not be a problem, one can easy remove
unneeded information (for example with some shell tools (grep, sed,
...). various sorting options might also be done by external programs.
I see two main uses for such a feature:
- enable the user to check, when a (modified, accidently removed) file
or directory was still there. For that, especially the timestamp and the
size of a file is important, a "ls -la" like output is probably exactly
that, what a user wants...
- simplify the programming of tools like web based restore utilities,
GUIs, ... For such tools one should provide as much as information as
possible, a program can always ignore unneeded information.
(2) rdiff-Backup should be able to parse the date-formats from the own
output.
Ok, patch at
http://cvs.savannah.nongnu.org/viewcvs/rdiff-backup/rdiff_backup/Time.py?root=rdiff-backup&r1=1.12&r2=1.13&makepatch=1&diff_format=u
Thanks.
Bye, Wolfgang
--
FH JOANNEUM / Fahrzeugtechnik
Automotive Engineering & Railway Engineering
Austria, 8010 Graz, Alte Poststrasse 149, Tel: ++43/(0)316/5453-8418
http://www.fh-joanneum.at/fzt/
_______________________________________________
rdiff-backup-users mailing list at [email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rdiff-backup-users
Wiki URL: http://rdiff-backup.solutionsfirst.com.au/index.php/RdiffBackupWiki
