> On 2023-02-11, at 12:02 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>
> On 10/02/2023 21:50, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> On 2/10/23 13:35, George Valkov wrote:
>>> Since the source and it’s clone have separate metadata,
>>> it should be possible to change it on the clone, to comply with standards.
>> Attached is a
> On 2023-02-11, at 2:48 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
>
> I want to emphasize the fact that we need to get to the bottom of the
> SEEK_HOLE / SEEK_DATA situation on macOS. Core programs other than 'cp' use
> these options, and working around the bug in 'cp' won't fix the bug elsewhere.
>
> One
> On 2023-02-10, at 11:50 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
>
> On 2/10/23 13:35, George Valkov wrote:
>
>> Since the source and it’s clone have separate metadata,
>> it should be possible to change it on the clone, to comply with standards.
>
> Attached is a hacky patch to do that. It also uses the
BV> While an example is always nice, isn't the last part of the above
BV> exactly telling what it's doing?
That is for experts to know. The rest of us need examples,
sort of like your idea, (please modify):
$ echo a a a b c c b b d b | xargs --max-args=1 | uniq --unique
b
d
b
I want to emphasize the fact that we need to get to the bottom of the
SEEK_HOLE / SEEK_DATA situation on macOS. Core programs other than 'cp'
use these options, and working around the bug in 'cp' won't fix the bug
elsewhere.
One possibility is to modify Gnulib so that SEEK_HOLE and SEEK_DATA
> On 2023-02-10, at 11:46 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>
> On 10/02/2023 20:45, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> On 2/10/23 10:58, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> I was considering "touch"ing the timestamps after also,
>>> but it's better to just maintain them as we're
>>> pointing to the same data after all.
>>
On 2/10/23 13:46, Pádraig Brady wrote:
Maybe. Though POSIX says cp "shall copy" and we're not making a copy,
we're making a reflink.
If that were an important reason not to clone, then cp should not have
made --reflink=auto the default, as clones would not be considered to be
copies.
On 2/3/23 08:12, Dan Jacobson wrote:
uniq INFO page says:
‘-u’
‘--unique’
Discard the last line that would be output for a repeated input
group. When used by itself, this option causes ‘uniq’ to print
unique lines, and nothing else.
This really needs some examples, to help
On 10/02/2023 21:50, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 2/10/23 13:35, George Valkov wrote:
Since the source and it’s clone have separate metadata,
it should be possible to change it on the clone, to comply with standards.
Attached is a hacky patch to do that. It also uses the new CLONE_ACL
flag. The old
On 2/10/23 13:35, George Valkov wrote:
Since the source and it’s clone have separate metadata,
it should be possible to change it on the clone, to comply with standards.
Attached is a hacky patch to do that. It also uses the new CLONE_ACL
flag. The old code apparently mishandled ACLs; the
On 10/02/2023 20:45, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 2/10/23 10:58, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I was considering "touch"ing the timestamps after also,
but it's better to just maintain them as we're
pointing to the same data after all.
For POSIX conformance we must touch if the user has specified only POSIX
> On 2023-02-10, at 10:45 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
>
> On 2/10/23 10:58, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> I was considering "touch"ing the timestamps after also,
>> but it's better to just maintain them as we're
>> pointing to the same data after all.
>
> For POSIX conformance we must touch if the user
On 2/10/23 10:58, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I was considering "touch"ing the timestamps after also,
but it's better to just maintain them as we're
pointing to the same data after all.
For POSIX conformance we must touch if the user has specified only POSIX
options (and has not specified -p).
And
> On 2023-02-10, at 8:58 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>
> On 10/02/2023 17:24, George Valkov wrote:
>>> On 2023-02-10, at 4:02 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/02/2023 12:13, George Valkov wrote:
> On 2023-02-10, at 11:18 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>
> I'll apply the simple
On 10/02/2023 17:24, George Valkov wrote:
On 2023-02-10, at 4:02 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 10/02/2023 12:13, George Valkov wrote:
On 2023-02-10, at 11:18 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I'll apply the simple patch later I think.
I have an interesting idea: If I copy a large file, say the 16
On 10/02/2023 15:41, ChuanGang Jiang wrote:
* NEWS : s/commmand/command/
* src/expand-common.c: s/specifed/specified/
* src/pr.c: s/e.g/e.g./
* tests/misc/comm.pl: s/ouput/output/
---
NEWS| 2 +-
src/expand-common.c | 2 +-
src/pr.c| 2 +-
tests/misc/comm.pl | 2
> On 2023-02-10, at 4:02 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>
> On 10/02/2023 12:13, George Valkov wrote:
>>> On 2023-02-10, at 11:18 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>>
>>> I'll apply the simple patch later I think.
>> I have an interesting idea: If I copy a large file, say the 16 GB disk image
>> where I
* NEWS : s/commmand/command/
* src/expand-common.c: s/specifed/specified/
* src/pr.c: s/e.g/e.g./
* tests/misc/comm.pl: s/ouput/output/
---
NEWS| 2 +-
src/expand-common.c | 2 +-
src/pr.c| 2 +-
tests/misc/comm.pl | 2 +-
4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4
On 10/02/2023 12:13, George Valkov wrote:
On 2023-02-10, at 11:18 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I'll apply the simple patch later I think.
I have an interesting idea: If I copy a large file, say the 16 GB disk image
where I compiled OpenWRT. So I copy this on the same filesystem, and check
disk
> On 2023-02-10, at 11:18 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>
> On 10/02/2023 03:57, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> On 2/9/23 01:20, George Valkov wrote:
>>> -#ifdef SEEK_HOLE
>>> +#if defined(SEEK_HOLE) && !defined(__APPLE__)
>> Instead of always disabling the SEEK_HOLE optimization, how about doing
>> it only
On 10/02/2023 03:57, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 2/9/23 01:20, George Valkov wrote:
-#ifdef SEEK_HOLE
+#if defined(SEEK_HOLE) && !defined(__APPLE__)
Instead of always disabling the SEEK_HOLE optimization, how about doing
it only on APFS files? Something like the attached, perhaps (this is
against
On 10/02/2023 01:03, George Valkov wrote:
On 2023-02-09, at 11:35 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 09/02/2023 17:23, George Valkov wrote:
On 2023-02-09, at 6:32 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 09/02/2023 15:57, George Valkov wrote:
On 2023-02-09, at 1:56 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 09/02/2023
22 matches
Mail list logo
