[9fans] vac flattens trees?
given a list of files like /fish /dog /snake/asp /snake/python, the results of a vac (as interpreted by vacfs) seem to be /fish /dog /asp /python. is this intentional? it seems unexpected, and makes doing selective backups using vac a bit awkward. this is vac on p9p and vacfs on plan9, if that matters.
Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?
2009/3/9 Anthony Sorace ano...@gmail.com: given a list of files like /fish /dog /snake/asp /snake/python, the results of a vac (as interpreted by vacfs) seem to be /fish /dog /asp /python. is this intentional? it seems unexpected, and makes doing selective backups using vac a bit awkward. i suppose your preferred behaviour would be for it to do a treewise merge of the paths and vac the shallowest root that contains all the paths, missing out all contents that aren't under one of the named paths. this seems like quite an involved operation, when you can get much the same result by building a custom namespace containing the trees you want (admittedly, a recursive mntgen would be useful here).
Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 6:35 AM, Anthony Sorace ano...@gmail.com wrote: given a list of files like /fish /dog /snake/asp /snake/python, the results of a vac (as interpreted by vacfs) seem to be /fish /dog /asp /python. is this intentional? it seems unexpected, and makes doing selective backups using vac a bit awkward. it is intentional, so that you can say vac /long/path/to/usr/rsc and get a vac with just rsc in the top level. if you want selective backups you can use the -x flag. russ
Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 8:43 AM, roger peppe rogpe...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/3/9 Russ Cox r...@swtch.com: if you want selective backups you can use the -x flag. presumably you mean the -e flag? i meant the -x flag (he said he was on p9p). http://swtch.com/plan9port/man/man1/vac.html russ
Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?
2009/3/9 Russ Cox r...@swtch.com: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 8:43 AM, roger peppe rogpe...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/3/9 Russ Cox r...@swtch.com: if you want selective backups you can use the -x flag. presumably you mean the -e flag? i meant the -x flag (he said he was on p9p). http://swtch.com/plan9port/man/man1/vac.html ah. that's new since i downloaded my p9p copy. my apologies.
Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?
You can vac the directories separately and then use vac -m to create an archive that looks any way you want. On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Anthony Sorace ano...@gmail.com wrote: given a list of files like /fish /dog /snake/asp /snake/python, the results of a vac (as interpreted by vacfs) seem to be /fish /dog /asp /python. is this intentional? it seems unexpected, and makes doing selective backups using vac a bit awkward. this is vac on p9p and vacfs on plan9, if that matters.
Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?
i think include fish/clown exclude fish/* and then vac fish dog pig would be fine. i haven't tried this, but i know there are some vac users who use -x quite a bit. russ
Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?
On Mon Mar 9 23:30:22 EDT 2009, ano...@gmail.com wrote: that seems a little awkward. erik's suggestion is what i think i'd really like. rog's would be okay, although still somewhatawkward, were i on plan 9; since i'm not, i think i have russ's option. so with -x, say i had a tree: /dog /cat /fish/guppie /fish/clown /pig and i wanted /dog, /cat, and /fish/clown. would three includes be sufficent there, or do i need it include /fish and then exclude /fish/guppie, to get the heirarchy? i do wish more tools used proto. the format is so nice. oh, you already know what i'm going to suggest, so just get to it! russ: i don't think in understand your motivating case. if you want to flatten /some/long/path/target to just target, why can't you just cd there? there must be some other part i haven't gotten yet. - erik
Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?
Erik Quanstrom wrote: On Mon Mar 9 23:30:22 EDT 2009, ano...@gmail.com wrote: that seems a little awkward. erik's suggestion is what i think i'd really like. rog's would be okay, although still somewhatawkward, were i on plan 9; since i'm not, i think i have russ's option. so with -x, say i had a tree: /dog /cat /fish/guppie /fish/clown /pig and i wanted /dog, /cat, and /fish/clown. would three includes be sufficent there, or do i need it include /fish and then exclude /fish/guppie, to get the heirarchy? i do wish more tools used proto. the format is so nice. oh, you already know what i'm going to suggest, so just get to it! kenfs? ;) John
