Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:11:33 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>>>> "ND" == Nick Duffek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>>> wrote the following on Tue, 12 Mar 2002 08:37:58 -0500 (EST)
ND> However, text files tend to change more frequently and in a
ND> diff-friendly fashion. Would you agree that usually it would
ND> waste space to snapshot them instead of diffing them?
ND> What about viewing hard links in rdiff-backup-data as a special
ND> case of compression, i.e. of noticing similarities between files
ND> and saving the similar sections once instead of multiple times?
ND> If there were long-term plans for rdiff-backup to do that for
ND> all files, then the hard-link space savings question could be
ND> ignored, since eventually it would become irrelevant.
Hmm, I'm not sure I understand.. Could you explain what you mean?
ND> Yes, hard links in rdiff-backup-data would save me a small
ND> amount of space, but it would complicate the task of manually
ND> fixing things when there's something wrong, which for me
ND> counterbalances the small space benefit.
Ok, this makes sense. And not having to worry about increments in
rdiff-backup-data would make saving hard links even easier. Well,
I'll see if I can get around to actually doing this sometime soon.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 01/15/2001
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----