Matthew A. Thompson, Contractor, Code 6189 <matthew.thompson.ctr <at> nrl.navy.mil> writes:
> Update on my problem. Through the prompting of Kevin Fenzi on the > Bugzilla I filed: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486426 > > I tried "--no-eas", with no go, but mounting NTFS-3G 2009.2.1 with > default options (whatever that is) *and* using "--no-acls" does work. > > So, a question: which is better? Should I mount my drive using > "streams_interface=none" and then run rdiff-backup as usual OR mount > with default and use rdiff-backup --no-acls? Are these options > equivalent, or does one neglect information the other doesn't? "rdiff-backup --no-acls" is better because it will also save User EAs, though you can have the same problem with the Security and Trusted namespace EAs. > Also, for whom is this a "bug" (if a bug at all)? NTFS-3G or > rdiff-backup...or something else entirely? Everything seems to work as expected. Stable NTFS-3G (not the Advanced one which has full user ownership, permission, ACL, etc handling) supports only the User namespace EAs. ACLs are using EAs in the System namespace. This is why --no-acls works. --no-eas failing is somehow unexpected from rdiff-backup unless it means "all EAs except ACLs", i.e. "ignore all EAs except ACL EAs". Regards, Szaka -- NTFS-3G: http://ntfs-3g.org _______________________________________________ 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
