Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Resource forks HFS+

[Daniel Hazelbaker]

On 7/8/03 11:04 AM, "Ben Escoto" <address@hidden> wrote:

>>>>>> "DH" == Daniel Hazelbaker <address@hidden>
>>>>>> wrote the following on Mon, 07 Jul 2003 14:37:43 -0700
> 
> DH> I am trying to figure out how to implement a new option to
> DH> rdiff-backup.  It would be useful for Mac OS X machines only
> DH> running on HFS+ file systems.  The option would be
> DH> --use-resource-forks and would return the filename and the
> DH> filename + "/rsrc".
> 
> If you want this feature to go into the main version, you may want to
> look at the CVS version.  In the fs_abilities.py file it tries to
> autodetect various features of the file system, so extra options like
> --use-resource-fork are unnecessary.  Also it supports extended
> attributes, which may be similar to resource forks.
> 
> Iterate_fast should do exactly the same thing as Iterate.  Profiling
> said that Iterate was a bottleneck, so I rewrote it, but left the old
> version there for documentation purposes (since Iterate_fast is hard
> to understand, as you said).

Right.. My only real confusion was just from lack of python knowledge. I am
not sure I am understanding the flow control properly, but I guess verbose 5
will tell me that. :)

> Also one problem I see right away is that some of the code in
> backup.py assumes that a file foo/bar won't be found unless foo is a
> directory (check out PatchITRB.can_fast_process(..)).

Hmm..  I will try verbose 5 with some simple tests and see if I can make it
work.  I don't know enough about python to know if there is really a better
way to do this or not.

> I don't have
> much mac experience but it also seems that file foo/rsrc wouldn't be a
> true file, so there would be problems changing it's permissions, etc.

Chmod/chown/chgrp work "fine" on the foo/rsrc files. Meaning they work
without error. In actuality it changes the permissions on the true file,
though that should not be an issue since the source permissions on the data
file and resource fork would match too.

> It may be easier to assimilate the resource forks to extended
> attributes.  Can they also be accessed with
> getxattr/setxattr/listxattr?

I doubt it, since getxattr/setxattr/listxattr don't exist on OS X, atleast
they are nowhere to be found in /usr/include/*. Hmm, for that matter it
doesn't exist on my linux system either. I'll have to do some digging and
see if I can find out about that.

Daniel