Re: [Bug-tar] --listed-incremental/--no-recursion inconsistencies

[Miek Gieben]

[On 22 Feb, @ 11:07, Sergey wrote in "Re: [Bug-tar] --listed-increme ..."]
> Of course they are included thrice. The output from `find /tmp/hdup2
> -name "*"' contains:
> 
> /tmp/hdup2
> /tmp/hdup2/doc/
> /tmp/hdup2/doc/hdup.conf.5
> 
> When archiving, tar first descends into /tmp/hdup2 subdirectory and
> archives all its contents, including /tmp/hdup2/doc/hdup.conf.5, then
> it sees `/tmp/hdup2/doc/' line, descends into the subdirectory
> and archives its contents, again including hdup.conf.5. Finally, it
> reads `/tmp/hdup2/doc/hdup.conf.5' line and archives the file. Hence
> three copies. In other words, nomber of copies of each file
> archived this way equals to the nesting depth of this file beneath
> the first directory.
> 
> As you have correctly stated, --no-recursion should be used here.
> 
> Another way would be to use the following command to obtain
> the file list:
> 
>     find /tmp/hdup2/ -not -type d -print
> 
> This way the resulting file list will not contain directories.    

Yes, that was my fix too (for hdup), but then you don't have 
any directory information in the archive, which is not that handy
when you restore from it. Empty directories will not be included at
all. This will all work, but it's kind of annoying.

> > % ./tar --listed-incremental bla --no-recursion --create --file 
> > hdup2.tar.gz\
> >    --gzip --verbose --files-from hdup2-filelist|grep hdup.conf.5
> 
> --no-recursion won't work with incremental backups (at least now).
> Tar should have printed the warning instead of silently ignoring
> it.

ah, ok. that makes sense :-) Any idea when this will work? I looked at
the tar source a long time ago, maybe it's time to look again :-)

--
grtz,
  - Miek

http://www.miek.nl                   http://www.nlnetlabs.nl