Arne Jansen <sensi...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On 19.10.2012 12:17, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Arne Jansen <sensi...@gmx.net> wrote:
> >>> Is this an attempt to create a competition for TAR?
> >> Not really. We'd have preferred tar if it would have been powerful enough.
> >> It's more an alternative to rsync for incremental updates. I really
> >> like the send/receive feature and want to make it available for cross-
> >> platform syncs.
> > TAR with the star extensions that are also implemented by many other recent
> > TAR
> > programs should do, what are you missing?
> As said I've not done the research myself, but operations that come to mind
> - partial updates of files
How do you intend to detect this _after_ the original file was updated?
> - sparse files
supported in an efficient way by star
> - punch hole
As this is a specific case of a sparse file, it could be added
> - truncate
> - rename
part of the incremental restore architecture from star, but needs a restore
symbol table on the receiving system
> - referencing parts of other files as the data to write (reflinks)
There is no user space interface to detect this, why do you need it?
> - create snapshot
star supports incrementals. or do you mean that a snapshot should be set up on
the reeiving site?
> Do star support these operation? Are they part of any standard?
> Also, are chmod/chown/set atime/mtime possible on existing files?
star allows to call:
star -x -xmeta
to _only_ extract meta data from a normal tar archive and it allows to create a
specific meta data only archve via star -c -meta
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
zfs-discuss mailing list