Hi,
i wrote:
md5sum [...] seems surplus.
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
Right, but it would seem to fail for hardlinked files or deduped files,
because it would weight one of the files in different places than the
other.
Oh. I misunderstood the md5sum part again. It's for
the content indeed -
Hi,
About the --sort-weight-list approach which is possible with
already released xorriso versions:
(find . -type f -print0 | xargs -0 md5sum | sort | cut -f2- -d/ ; find .
-mindepth 1 \! -type f | sort | cut -f2- -d/ ) | awk '{ N=N+1; print N
$0 }'
I misunderstood the role of md5sum here.
On Thu 2015-06-04 09:53:11 -0400, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
I saw some sin-list page about packages shortly after
xorriso-1.4.0 was released.
It complained about libburn's doc/doxygen.conf.in which i hope to
have fixed by
http://libburnia-project.org/changeset/5446
Thanks! We don't think it's
Hi,
If we can identify the specific commands (beyond what you point out
below), would there a general interest upstream in something like a
--reproducible=TARGETDATE
The syntax would have to be different and probably a more
comprehensive name will come to us when we know what xorriso
features
On Thu 2015-06-04 14:08:36 -0400, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
The syntax would have to be different and probably a more
comprehensive name will come to us when we know what xorriso
features in particular shall be bundled with the new command.
That seems like a reasonable approach.
The users will
Hi,
the current situation with data extents looks not good for
the purpose of reproducability.
The files are grafted into a red-black tree according to
their inode and device numbers on hard disk. This is done
to merge hardlinks.
The tree is then serialized into an array which gets
sorted
