Re: tar incremental backups and ctime‏ problem

[Eric Blake]

On 05/23/2016 10:56 AM, x y wrote:
>> It is always possible to create file list with find and use that
>> to tar whatever using --files-from=FILE option
> 
>> I don't see the need to change tar behaviour to meet your wish.
> 
> Hi Marco,
> 
> Consider that you are working in the IT department of a company and
> you have thousands of documents in your file server. Concerning the
> --file-from option, how can you guess the name of the files which are
> just only going to be viewed by the workers? Those files would be not
> modified but since the ctime stamp will be updated, they will be
> included in the next incremental backup. Why to lose time with the
> --files-from option and make things more difficult? Adding an option
> to tar.exe to ignore the cname time stamp during differential \
> incremental backups should be possible. This should be the natural
> method. Tools like rsync does not suffer from such problems so my
> request should make sense.

If it makes that much sense, then propose the extension upstream
(bug-tar@gnu.org); once upstream implements it, Cygwin will pick it up
automatically.  Until then, I don't see a reason for Cygwin to
needlessly differ from upstream.

> 
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Marco Atzeri <marco.atzeri@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 23/05/2016 16:57, x y wrote:
>>>>
>>>> mtime is fakeable, ctime is not.  Using only mtime makes it likely that

You're still top-posting.  It's okay to trim the portion of the email
you don't reply to.


-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 604 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/attachments/20160523/88993ad5/attachment.sig>