Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:45:13 -0400 (EDT) | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: silent semantic changes with reiser4 |
| |
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.
Currently I see no way to distinguish between the stuff that should be backed up and the stuff that shouldn't.
That problem needs to be resolved before we can even start thinking about fixing archivers...
-- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |