On 5/7/07, ScottZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
With --source-backup the tree structure of the original source file is also
being included in the --backup-dir directory.
That is an idiosyncracy of the quick-and-dirty way I implemented the
source backup, and I documented it in the patched man page
le of
directories, but could be a problem for those with a deeper one.
Or am I not specifying something correctly?
Again, many thanks for this.
-Scott
> Original Message
> Subject: Re: Using --remove-source-files with backup?
> From: "Matt McCutchen" <[EM
On 5/6/07, Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The attached patch to rsync 2.6.9 adds a --source-backup
option that backs up removed source files.
Oops, I made a typo in the addition to the man page. The fixed patch
is attached.
Matt
This patch to rsync 2.6.9 adds a --source-backup opti
On 5/4/07, ScottZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--remove-source-files works fine for this.
An issue has come up in that I need to be able to backup the removed local
source files as well.
I think the simplest way to accomplish this is to make a modified
version of rsync that supports backing up
> Essentially you want to move each source file to another directory
> after it is successfully transferred.
Exactly.
> I'm sure there's a way to accomplish this, but it might not be
> simple. I'll tell you if I find one.
Thanks for looking at this Matt.
--
To unsubscribe or change opt
On 5/4/07, ScottZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is this a bug or is the backup option only able to backup deleted target files?
The latter: --backup only backs up files deleted from the target.
Is there another way around this?
Essentially you want to move each source file to another directory
