On Sat, Mar 13, 2004 at 01:23:31PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote: > (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.)
I agree, that is a *much* better idea. Without modifying the receiving rsync, the files will have to be saved in a split or streamed form on the destination (even if the destination is HFS+ capable), but that doesn't seem like a big loss to me. It also means that if you sync the files BACK to the original sender, you can't safely "convert back" automatically, but I think that's inescapable, (except in below scenario): > (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.) This is good too. I don't think there's any room left in the unsigned char to hold another flag, but if a protocol rev is necessary, widening the flag bits is much more flexible than explicit file-ids. Andrew -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html