Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:snapshot: 406 ]

Total 406 documents matching your query.

1. 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 11:36:05 +0000
A Netapp NFS server containing a file (xxx) and a snapshot of the file (.snapshot/xxx) will give them the same inode number. Unfortunately, 'cp .snapshot/xxx xxx' (in order to recover the snapshot ve
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00034.html (6,045 bytes)

2. Re: 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 13:36:20 +0100
<http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/cp.html> If source_file references the same file as dest_file, cp may write a diagnostic message to standard error; it shall do nothing more w
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00035.html (6,619 bytes)

3. Re: 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 14:09:38 +0100
Yes. Use cp's --backup (-b) option. Then, cp can be sure that opening the destination file (for writing) will not destroy the source file. Using --backup has the added advantage that the destination
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00036.html (8,131 bytes)

4. Re: 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 12:54:44 +0000
Well, whether source_file references the same file as dest_file is not quite clear. They have the same inode, yes, but different content. Tim. */ Attachment: pgpyF_69Ab9V5.pgp Description: PGP signat
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00037.html (6,390 bytes)

5. Re: 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 12:55:32 +0000
^ number Tim. */ Attachment: pgp4OhtZt2qfz.pgp Description: PGP signature
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00038.html (5,887 bytes)

6. Re: 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:45:05 +0100
Can someone make sure this patch works and let me know? Just apply it, build cp, and then run a command like ./cp .snapshot/F F for some file F, on a NetApp-backed file system. The above command shou
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00039.html (10,374 bytes)

7. Re: 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 17:11:23 +0100
As Jim already wrote, POSIX is quite clear about that. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, address@hidden SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany Key fingerprint = 58C
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00040.html (5,924 bytes)

8. Re: 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:23:23 -0800
I just tried it on a Solaris 8 host with a remote NetApp filesystem, and it sort of worked, but it had problems. 1. Patched GNU "cp .snapshot/weekly.1/F F" fails if F has not been changed since the s
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00041.html (7,268 bytes)

9. Re: 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 22:52:51 +0100
Thanks for the quick work! If you are motivated, you might be able to find a solution yourself. You could try comparing the entire `struct stat's of two file/snapshot pairs, one where the snapshot is
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00042.html (7,184 bytes)

10. Re: 'cp: .snapshot/xxx and xxx are identical' (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:40:41 -0800
The only difference that I found was the st_atime field. For example: $ ls -ltu .addressbook .snapshot/*/.addressbook -rw-r--r-- 1 eggert fac 0 Mar 7 15:00 .snapshot/hourly.0/.addressbook -rw-r--r--
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-03/msg00043.html (8,555 bytes)

11. bug in rsnapshot 1.2.1 due to change in /bin/cp 5.93 (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 10:27:51 -0700
I recently installed Fedora Core 5 on a machine and downloaded the rsnapshot RPM (v1.2.1) from the Downloads section of www.rsnapshot.org. FC5 uses /bin/cp version 5.93, and this version doesn't like
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2006-04/msg00018.html (6,812 bytes)

12. Re: bug in rsnapshot 1.2.1 due to change in /bin/cp 5.93 (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 02:22:15 +0000
Thanks for the bug report. However, this issue has already come up in the past: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2006-02/msg00069.html http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2006-04/msg00019.html (6,028 bytes)

13. Re: bug in rsnapshot 1.2.1 due to change in /bin/cp 5.93 (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2006 21:52:07 -0700
Eric-- Thank you for your swift and gracious reply, especially since I hadn't checked the mailing list archives to see whether the bug had already been noted. My bad. Whatever way rsnapshot decides t
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2006-04/msg00023.html (6,743 bytes)

14. Re: bug in rsnapshot 1.2.1 due to change in /bin/cp 5.93 (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 14:40:14 +0100
We use GNU cp because of the -l option, but that's not available in other peoples versions of cp, so we also have our own clone of that functionality. Our version is somewhat slower, but is portable.
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2006-04/msg00025.html (6,246 bytes)

15. Re: bug in rsnapshot 1.2.1 due to change in /bin/cp 5.93 (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 00:23:26 -0700
cpio is portable? That's news to me. I've been staying away from cpio ever since it massively screwed up one of my directory hierarchies due to its truncation of inode numbers to 16 bits. (This was o
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2006-04/msg00032.html (5,189 bytes)

16. coreutils snapshot available (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 00:31:19 +0100
In case you can try the build/test routine using the very latest snapshot tarball, here it is: http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz.sig
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-01/msg00220.html (4,290 bytes)

17. Re: coreutils snapshot available (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 18:02:39 -0600
http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz.sig This includes the very latest changes from gnulib (as of an hour ago), so if you find a portabi
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00015.html (5,317 bytes)

18. Re: coreutils snapshot available (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 01:27:04 +0100
I've just updated the above links with the latest.
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00017.html (4,676 bytes)

19. new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:48:08 +0100
Last night I made another coreutils snapshot: http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz.sig aka http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-ss-2007-
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00096.html (6,510 bytes)

20. Re: new coreutils snapshot; are they useful? (score: 1)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:22:56 -0600
http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-dirty.tar.gz.sig aka http://meyering.net/cu/coreutils-6.7-ss-2007-02-14.00:04:10+0.tar.gz http://meyering.net/cu
/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2007-02/msg00097.html (7,399 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu