Thanks for the pointer to that mergesort thread and for the md5 patch. Is rsync going to stick with qsort as the default sorting algorithm? Would a patch to add a --mergesort option be accepted?
Even though most of my boxes are Linux and it appears that qsort usually runs as a mergesort, I would still like an option to enforce it so I don't get suprised one day when an actual qsort is used due to memory contention. And what would be the chances of a --sha1 option patch being accepted? Thank you again, Andrew On 6/13/05, Wayne Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 05:24:45PM -0600, Andrew Shewmaker wrote: > > Our current practices would benefit if rsync were enhanced to handle > > duplicate names deterministically as described in the todo list. > > One proposed solution to this was to use a functioned called > mergesort(). A patch was provided that includes a compatibility > function for systems that don't include mergesort(): > > http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2004-August/010398.html > > > we would also be interested in the ability to optionally use a > > stronger checksum algorithm. > > I just put a diff into the patches dir that implements the --md5 option > (extracted and cleaned up from a larger patch set that was sent to me by > Wolfgang Neuman): > > http://rsync.samba.org/ftp/unpacked/rsync/patches/md5.diff > > As you'd expect, this tells rsync to use MD5 checksums instead of MD4. > > ..wayne.. > -- Andrew Shewmaker -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html