>>>>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:39:58 +0100, Ingo Jochim said: > > C M Reinehr schrieb: > > On Wednesday 16 January 2008 09:49, Ingo Jochim wrote: > > > >> C M Reinehr schrieb: > >> > >>> On Wednesday 16 January 2008 08:54, Ingo Jochim wrote: > >>> > >>>> Dan Langille schrieb: > >>>> >>>>> Reply has been rearranged to retain chronological order. > >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 16, 2008, at 9:22 AM, Ingo Jochim wrote: >>>>> > >>>>>> Dan Langille schrieb: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Ingo Jochim wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I create hard links for the files I want to backup so that while I > >>>>>>>> do the backup the files can get deleted by someone else. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> The problem is that on an incremental backup I get a backup of all > >>>>>>>> the files again like I got on a full backup. > >>>>>>>> I create all the hard links right before the backup. A hard link > >>>>>>>> points to the same file with the same date and so. > >>>>>>>> Why does bacula backup all the files again? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Because the dates on the hard links are newer than the previous > >>>>>>> backup. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Dan, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> a hard link looks like the original file. So it always should have > >>>>>>> the same date. > >>>>>>> Below you will see that the hard link (second line) has the same > >>>>>>> date at > >>>>>>> the "original" file. > >>>>>>> I created the hard link today but it also has the date from november > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>> 23th. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Ingo > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# ls -l file.JPG > >>>>>>> -rw-rw-r-- 2 root root 314099 23. Nov 15:58 file.JPG > >>>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# ls -l backup/file.JPG > >>>>>>> -rw-rw-r-- 2 mother mother 314099 23. Nov 15:58 backup/file.JPG > >>>>>>> >>>>> You create these hard links just before you run >>>>> each backup. Is that correct? >>>>> > >>>> Correct. > >>>> So I do like a snapshot. The original files can get deleted after the > >>>> snapshot and I'm still able to finish my backup to tape. > >>>> > >>>> Ingo > >>>> > >>> Ingo, > >>> > >>> While the modification time is that of the original file, the access time > >>> & creation time are that of the link. > >>> > >>> cmr > >>> > >> Ok. Got it. But how can I avoid that I get a new date? > >> Is there a presereve parameter like on cp? > >> > >> Ingo > >> > > > > The only thing that comes to mind would be to use 'touch' to modify the > > times > > of the link to those of the original file. If you are using a shell script > > to > > create your hard links you could modify it to obtain the times and then > > execute touch with the appropriate options. > > > > cmr > > > > Good idea. > So what is important for the backup? ctime or mtime?
Both, by default, but see the mtimeonly fileset option. Of course this prevents tracking of anything else that only changes the ctime, e.g. chmod. > I't not able to reset the ctime. Correct. > How can I have ls give me the time format I will need for touch to reset > the time? > > 200012311800 <---> 31. Dez 2000 I think you'll need to use perl or something to generate it from the stat function. It won't be be needed if you use the mtimeonly option, though. __Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
