Re: silent semantic changes with reiser4

Hubert Chan
2004-08-27T18:40:27Z

>>>>> "Spam" == Spam <spam@tnonline.net> writes:

> Rik van Riel wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Hans Reiser wrote:
>>> Why are you guys even considering going to any pain at all to
>>> distort semantics for the sake of backup? tar is easy, we'll fix it
>>> and send in a patch.

>> It's not as easy as you make it out, and not just because there are a
>> few dozen backup programs that need fixing.

>> The problem is more fundamental than that. Some of the file streams
>> proposed need to be backed up, while others are alternative
>> presentations of the file, which should not be backed up.

Spam> No, not really. This is a user decision and should be options in
Spam> the backup software. I don't think it is up to the kernel,
Spam> filesystem, or the OS in general to decide what information the
Spam> user want to retain or not.

Why not just define an attribute named something like "do-not-backup"?
Then whatever program that generates the thumbnail can automatically add
the do-not-backup bit, and the backup software knows to ignore it.
(Obviously, that bit should apply recursively down the subtree.)

--
Hubert Chan <hubert@uhoreg.ca> - http://www.uhoreg.ca/
PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA
Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA
Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred.