Maybe a better way to ask the previous question...

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Maybe a better way to ask the previous question...

Errol Siegel
It occurred to me that perhaps there is a better way
to ask my question about reorganizing directory
structures:

Does rdiff-backup support moving a source file or
directory?

For example, with cvs you can't move a file.  You have
to do a 'remove' of the file from its original
location and an 'add' of the file to its new location.
 When you do this there is no way to link the revision
history of the old and new files (which are really the
same file in two different locations).

>From what I understand, rdiff-backup works the same
way.  Am I right?  If so, is there a way to work
around this by editing/moving rdiff-backup-data info
in the repository to match the new source directory
structure?

I wouldn't mind the 'remove and add in new location'
idea so much except the source files are really big
and I'm backing up over the internet.  It would be
nice to NOT lose the revision history too...

Does my question make more sense now?

Thanks again,
Errol


               
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com



_______________________________________________
rdiff-backup-users mailing list at [hidden email]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rdiff-backup-users
Wiki URL: http://rdiff-backup.solutionsfirst.com.au/index.php/RdiffBackupWiki
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Maybe a better way to ask the previous question...

Ben Escoto
>>>>> Errol Siegel <[hidden email]>
>>>>> wrote the following on Sun, 25 Dec 2005 17:32:10 -0800 (PST)
> It occurred to me that perhaps there is a better way
> to ask my question about reorganizing directory
> structures:
>
> Does rdiff-backup support moving a source file or
> directory?

Here is a better way perhaps of answering your question.  Consider

1) rdiff-backup source dest
2) mv source source2
3) rdiff-backup source2 dest

Step 3 will be fast and not take much disk space.  On the other hand

1) rdiff-backup source dest
2) mv source/dir1 source/dir2
3) rdiff-backup source dest

If source/dir2 is big, step 3 here will take a long time and a lot of
disk space.


--
Ben Escoto

_______________________________________________
rdiff-backup-users mailing list at [hidden email]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rdiff-backup-users
Wiki URL: http://rdiff-backup.solutionsfirst.com.au/index.php/RdiffBackupWiki

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment