On 03/28/10 12:12, Tim Haley wrote:
I am sponsoring the following fast-track on behalf of myself. This
case introduces a new zfs sub-command for describing differences
between snapshots in a zfs hierarchy. A delegated permission and
read-only system attribute are also introduced to support
On 28/03/2010 20:12, Tim Haley wrote:
I am sponsoring the following fast-track on behalf of myself. This
case introduces a new zfs sub-command for describing differences
between snapshots in a zfs hierarchy. A delegated permission and
read-only system attribute are also introduced to support
On 03/28/10 21:12, Tim Haley wrote:
Five types of change are described:
o File/Directory modified
o File/Directory present in older snapshot but not newer
o File/Directory present in newer snapshot but not older
o File/Directory renamed
o File link count changed
Is there any provision
On 29/03/2010 09:44, Joep Vesseur wrote:
On 03/28/10 21:12, Tim Haley wrote:
Five types of change are described:
o File/Directory modified
o File/Directory present in older snapshot but not newer
o File/Directory present in newer snapshot but not older
o File/Directory renamed
o File link
On 03/29/10 02:44 AM, Joep Vesseur wrote:
On 03/28/10 21:12, Tim Haley wrote:
Five types of change are described:
o File/Directory modified
o File/Directory present in older snapshot but not newer
o File/Directory present in newer snapshot but not older
o File/Directory renamed
o File
On 03/29/10 16:57, Tim Haley wrote:
Not sure exactly what sort of properties you have in mind - many I can
think of would
result in us detecting a modification to the file itself, for example:
# echo 'tim was here' file
# zfs snapshot toad/timh at before
# touch file
# zfs snapshot
On 03/29/10 09:01 AM, Joep Vesseur wrote:
On 03/29/10 16:57, Tim Haley wrote:
Not sure exactly what sort of properties you have in mind - many I can
think of would
result in us detecting a modification to the file itself, for example:
# echo 'tim was here' file
# zfs snapshot toad/timh at
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 05:02:45PM +, Jeremy Harris wrote:
Unfortunately, the cache invalidation and/or reload is also the latter
time. I think this is a mistake. If I, with suitable permissions, cannot
replace the binary of a utility in the filesystem of my system and
get the expected
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 01:12:16PM -0600, Tim Haley wrote:
+If the modification involved a change in the link count of a
+file, the change will be expressed as a delta within
+parentheses on the modification line. Example outputs are
+below:
+
+ M
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 09:05:52AM -0600, Tim Haley wrote:
On 03/29/10 09:01 AM, Joep Vesseur wrote:
On 03/29/10 16:57, Tim Haley wrote:
Not sure exactly what sort of properties you have in mind - many I can
think of would
result in us detecting a modification to the file itself, for example:
On 03/29/10 12:14 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 01:12:16PM -0600, Tim Haley wrote:
+If the modification involved a change in the link count of a
+file, the change will be expressed as a delta within
+parentheses on the modification line. Example
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:23:56PM -0400, Sebastien Roy wrote:
Is there any escaping of whitespace and non-printable characters in the
pathnames? If not then the above format is ambiguous and cannot be
safely scripted.
Taking a step back here, this subcommand is not the only zfs
subcommand
On 03/29/10 12:34 PM, Steve Mckinty wrote:
Sebastien Roy wrote:
Taking a step back here, this subcommand is not the only zfs
subcommand whose output could be subject to parsing by scripts. Adding
parsable output should be something that is thought-through for the
entire suite of subcommands
Sebastien Roy wrote:
On 03/29/10 12:14 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 01:12:16PM -0600, Tim Haley wrote:
+If the modification involved a change in the link count of a
+file, the change will be expressed as a delta within
+parentheses on the
On 03/29/10 12:33 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:23:56PM -0400, Sebastien Roy wrote:
Is there any escaping of whitespace and non-printable characters in the
pathnames? If not then the above format is ambiguous and cannot be
safely scripted.
Taking a step back here,
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 01:17:30PM -0400, Sebastien Roy wrote:
Understood, and I see that now. It would indeed make sense to be
consistent and have -H for this subcommand as well.
Agreed. Do you agree re: backslash-escaping?
I could have filenames with ' - ' in them that would render the
On Mar 28, 2010, at 13:12:16 -0600, Tim Haley wrote:
Please find documentation nits in-line below...
- Don
... ... ...
4. Technical Description
There is a long-standing RFE for zfs to be able to describe
what has changed between the snapshots of a dataset.
To
On 29/03/2010 18:30, Don Cragun wrote:
+ + Indicates the file/directory was added in the later dataset
+ - Indicates the file/directory was removed in the later dataset
+ M Indicates the file/directory was modified in the later dataset
+ R Indicates the
On 03/29/10 01:24 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 01:17:30PM -0400, Sebastien Roy wrote:
Understood, and I see that now. It would indeed make sense to be
consistent and have -H for this subcommand as well.
Agreed. Do you agree re: backslash-escaping?
Yes, but presumably
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 06:42:17PM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 29/03/2010 18:30, Don Cragun wrote:
+ + Indicates the file/directory was added in the later dataset
+ - Indicates the file/directory was removed in the later dataset
+ M Indicates the
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Nicolas Williams
Nicolas.Williams at sun.com wrote:
If you replace programs delivered by Solaris itself they you've rendered
your system unsupportable and, indeed, we will not support it.
That may be true of Oracle's commercial Solaris Product, but we are
On Mar 29, 2010, at 10:42 AM, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 29/03/2010 18:30, Don Cragun wrote:
+ + Indicates the file/directory was added in the later dataset
+ - Indicates the file/directory was removed in the later dataset
+ M Indicates the file/directory was
On 29/03/2010 19:21, Don Cragun wrote:
On Mar 29, 2010, at 10:42 AM, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 29/03/2010 18:30, Don Cragun wrote:
+ + Indicates the file/directory was added in the later dataset
+ - Indicates the file/directory was removed in the later dataset
+
On Mar 29, 2010, at 10:56 AM, Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 06:42:17PM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 29/03/2010 18:30, Don Cragun wrote:
+ + Indicates the file/directory was added in the later dataset
+ - Indicates the file/directory was removed in
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 11:14:24AM -0700, Bart Smaalders wrote:
On 03/29/10 11:01, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
How do commands like ls and find handle printing of filenames with
arbitrary characters (newlines and such)?
In general, badly.
% touch `echo '\07'`
% ls
beep
%
Use ls -b:
Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 12:23:56PM -0400, Sebastien Roy wrote:
Is there any escaping of whitespace and non-printable characters in the
pathnames? If not then the above format is ambiguous and cannot be
safely scripted.
Taking a step back here, this
On 03/29/10 11:01, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
How do commands like ls and find handle printing of filenames with
arbitrary characters (newlines and such)?
In general, badly.
% touch `echo '\07'`
% ls
beep
%
- Bart
On Mar 29, 2010, at 11:37 AM, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 29/03/2010 19:21, Don Cragun wrote:
On Mar 29, 2010, at 10:42 AM, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 29/03/2010 18:30, Don Cragun wrote:
+ + Indicates the file/directory was added in the later dataset
+ - Indicates the
On 03/29/2010 07:18 PM, John Plocher wrote:
The architectural point is that the user/admin needs control of things
like this; with ksh93 builtins, they have that ability (i.e., they can
turn builtins off...) and update binutils packages and the like.
I'm suggesting that with better
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 11:18:25AM -0700, John Plocher wrote:
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Nicolas Williams
Nicolas.Williams at sun.com wrote:
If you replace programs delivered by Solaris itself they you've rendered
your system unsupportable and, indeed, we will not support it.
That
On 03/29/10 12:43 AM, Darren Reed wrote:
On 03/28/10 12:12, Tim Haley wrote:
I am sponsoring the following fast-track on behalf of myself. This
case introduces a new zfs sub-command for describing differences
between snapshots in a zfs hierarchy. A delegated permission and
read-only system
On Mon 29 Mar 2010 at 11:14AM, Bart Smaalders wrote:
On 03/29/10 11:01, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
How do commands like ls and find handle printing of filenames with
arbitrary characters (newlines and such)?
In general, badly.
Tim,
My concern, which others have hinted at, is that there are a
32 matches
Mail list logo
