On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 09:07:13PM -0800, Jeff Newmiller wrote: > Troy Arnold wrote: > > > > mv would be fine because the file isn't unlinked from the source until it > > has successfully been written to the destination. > > I strongly disagree, having had problems with mv and large numbers of files. > It isn't that data gets lost... it is simply that sorting out the mess > of directories and files in two different places if there is a problem > is a headache.
yeah, I agree with your disagreement :) mv is only fine if everything goes well. > > Still, I'd use rsync. It has the advantage that it can resume if for some > > reason the transfer gets interrupted. > > > > rsync -av dir1 /bla/bla/bla > > rsync -avr ? -a is 'archive' mode. It turns on a bunch of flags, including -r (recursive) rsync is the shiznit. -t _______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
