On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 11:17:43AM -0500, D Andrew Reynhout wrote: > The most straightforward and plausible idea I can think of > is to update the protocol to include explicit file-IDs > (instead of implicit offsets in the sorted flist)
I have no desire to see the current protocol get explicit IDs. I think it would be better to simply ensure that the lists sort identically on each side, and the best way to do that is to ensure that both sides sort the exact same list. For instance, in the prior example of munging the names using ".~~~" in place of "/..", I can think of two better solutions than having the lists differ on each side prior to the sort: (1) The sender would create the file list pre-munged (with a simpler naming scheme) but flagged in such a way that it would know that it had to tweak the name back into its unmunged form before opening it. (This solution avoids needing a modified rsync on the receiving side.) (2) The sender sends the list unmunged but flagged as "needing to be transformed". Such entries would then be munged sometime after the sort. (This solution has the disadvantage of requiring both sides to be upgraded, but it does do less munging, especially if the receiving side had native support for the resource-fork files.) ..wayne.. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html