Hi Patrick,
lfm uses python functions to move directories and files, and those use
byte-to-byte copy.
I can agree it could be slow for big contents, but it isn't dangerous at
all.
In fact (I don't remember v2.2, but v2.3) moving first copy contents and
then deletes source, so in case of process stop or any problem, original
data are never lost.
On the other hand, using "mv" we could lose control over the process:
stop/resume, progress information, and so on.
Those were the reasons I decided to use python functions instead of
external commands.
In fact I use lfm commands for not so big data and open PowerCLI (C-x) and
do cp/mv for bigger data.
Thanks for your feedback,
Iñigo Serna
On 2 December 2012 18:50, patrick295767 wrote:
> Package: lfm
> Version: 2.2-1
> Severity: important
>
> Hi,
>
> I have discovered that it is preferable not to use 'move' of lfm
>
> it is dangerous since it does copy the data differently than any linux
> mv function.
>
> lfm leaves chances for desaster of some data is the networking is
> failing when one copy over samba or nfs.
>
>
> It is highly recommended that lfm uses 'mv' for moving directories.
>
> Example:
>
> lfm
> move dvd01 /samba
> move dvd02 /samba
> with lfm it will takes ages, and it will copy bit per bits.
>
>
>
> with mv (utils of bin of linux), it will take 2sec since it simply tell
> linux to change the dir position.
>
> I hope it helped
>
> sincerely
>
>
>
> -- System Information:
> Debian Release: 6.0.2
> APT prefers stable-updates
> APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable')
> Architecture: i386 (i686)
>
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
> Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
> Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
>
> Versions of packages lfm depends on:
> ii python 2.6.6-3+squeeze6 interactive high-level
> object-orie
> ii python-support 1.0.10 automated rebuilding support
> for P
>
> lfm recommends no packages.
>
> lfm suggests no packages.
>
> -- no debconf information
>
>
--
Iñigo Serna
Katxijasotzaileak
