On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 04:04:44PM -0800, Chris Cogdon wrote: ... > --force is indeed necessary, as it isn't entirely replaced by > --delete-excluded. I think I detailed an example in #3500, but I'll > reiterate here. > > Say I'm mirroring a image website. Rather than mirror all the > automatically-generated index files, I just mirror the images and have the > local system generate the files straight after the rsync. However, if a > directory is deleted (and its contents) on the source side, only the > contents will be deleted on the destination side, since the index files > are not deleted (without --delete-excluded), and therefore the directory > is not empty. This is what --force is supposed to do, according to the man > page :)
Don't go by the man page -- it is very vague, and it doesn't address this specific case. > --delete-excluded is not the solution, as this will delete the index files > on the destination each time rsync is run. I dont want to regenerate > everything... only what's necessary to regenerate. Agreed. > So... I'm putting my vote in into having --force kept, and fixed to do > what's documented :) I'll continue trying to grok rsync to a point that I > can supply patches. I think I agree that it makes sense for --delete --force to delete destination directories even if they have excluded files in them, but I'm still cautious and want to reserve the right to change my mind when I see the code. > If I have questions about the code, should i send them to you, or to the > mailing list? The list. - Dave Dykstra