[9fans] vac flattens trees?

[9fans] vac flattens trees?

[Anthony Sorace]

given a list of files like "/fish /dog /snake/asp /snake/python", the
results of a vac (as interpreted by vacfs) seem to be "/fish /dog /asp
/python". is this intentional? it seems unexpected, and makes doing
selective backups using vac a bit awkward.

this is vac on p9p and vacfs on plan9, if that matters.

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[roger peppe]

2009/3/9 Anthony Sorace <anothy@gmail.com>:
> given a list of files like "/fish /dog /snake/asp /snake/python", the
> results of a vac (as interpreted by vacfs) seem to be "/fish /dog /asp
> /python". is this intentional? it seems unexpected, and makes doing
> selective backups using vac a bit awkward.

i suppose your preferred behaviour would be
for it to do a treewise merge of the paths and
vac the shallowest root that contains all the
paths, missing out all contents that aren't
under one of the named paths.

this seems like quite an involved operation,
when you can get much the same result
by building a custom namespace containing the
trees you want (admittedly, a recursive mntgen
would be useful here).

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[erik quanstrom]

> i suppose your preferred behaviour would be
> for it to do a treewise merge of the paths and
> vac the shallowest root that contains all the
> paths, missing out all contents that aren't
> under one of the named paths.
>
> this seems like quite an involved operation,
> when you can get much the same result
> by building a custom namespace containing the
> trees you want (admittedly, a recursive mntgen
> would be useful here).

wouldn't work on p9p.

it's hard to comment on the current behavior without
knowing the reasoning.  given your use case, it seems
like tar's model makes more sense.

a straightforward solution would be to have vac take
a proto.  i would think the -e flag would not scale.
then you can give a single root and include only the
stuff you want without changing current behavior.
and the bonus is that it works a lot like mkfs.

- erik

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[Russ Cox]

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 6:35 AM, Anthony Sorace <anothy@gmail.com> wrote:
> given a list of files like "/fish /dog /snake/asp /snake/python", the
> results of a vac (as interpreted by vacfs) seem to be "/fish /dog /asp
> /python". is this intentional? it seems unexpected, and makes doing
> selective backups using vac a bit awkward.

it is intentional, so that you can say
    vac /long/path/to/usr/rsc
and get a vac with just "rsc" in the top level.

if you want selective backups you
can use the -x flag.

russ

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[roger peppe]

2009/3/9 Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com>:
> if you want selective backups you
> can use the -x flag.

presumably you mean the -e flag?

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[Russ Cox]

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 8:43 AM, roger peppe <rogpeppe@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/3/9 Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com>:
>> if you want selective backups you
>> can use the -x flag.
>
> presumably you mean the -e flag?

i meant the -x flag (he said he was on p9p).

http://swtch.com/plan9port/man/man1/vac.html

russ

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[roger peppe]

2009/3/9 Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com>:
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 8:43 AM, roger peppe <rogpeppe@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2009/3/9 Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com>:
>>> if you want selective backups you
>>> can use the -x flag.
>>
>> presumably you mean the -e flag?
>
> i meant the -x flag (he said he was on p9p).
>
> http://swtch.com/plan9port/man/man1/vac.html

ah. that's new since i downloaded my p9p copy. my apologies.

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[Jeff Sickel]

The beauty of distributed source control...

Sync Early, Sync Often
http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/SyncEarlySyncOften


I like that more attention is being paid to the various ways of
using vac on p9p.  Maybe a sign of more papers for this year's
IWP9?

-jas

On Mar 9, 2009, at 2:11 PM, roger peppe wrote:

>
> ah. that's new since i downloaded my p9p copy. my apologies.
>

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[Latchesar Ionkov]

You can vac the directories separately and then use vac -m to create
an archive that looks any way you want.

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Anthony Sorace <anothy@gmail.com> wrote:
> given a list of files like "/fish /dog /snake/asp /snake/python", the
> results of a vac (as interpreted by vacfs) seem to be "/fish /dog /asp
> /python". is this intentional? it seems unexpected, and makes doing
> selective backups using vac a bit awkward.
>
> this is vac on p9p and vacfs on plan9, if that matters.
>
>

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[Anthony Sorace]

that seems a little awkward. erik's suggestion is what i
think i'd really like. rog's would be okay, although still
somewhatawkward, were i on plan 9; since i'm not, i think
i have russ's option. so with -x, say i had a tree:

/dog
/cat
/fish/guppie
/fish/clown
/pig

and i wanted /dog, /cat, and /fish/clown. would three
includes be sufficent there, or do i need it include /fish and
then exclude /fish/guppie, to get the heirarchy?

i do wish more tools used proto. the format is so nice.

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[erik quanstrom]

On Mon Mar  9 23:30:22 EDT 2009, anothy@gmail.com wrote:
> that seems a little awkward. erik's suggestion is what i
> think i'd really like. rog's would be okay, although still
> somewhatawkward, were i on plan 9; since i'm not, i think
> i have russ's option. so with -x, say i had a tree:
>
> /dog
> /cat
> /fish/guppie
> /fish/clown
> /pig
>
> and i wanted /dog, /cat, and /fish/clown. would three
> includes be sufficent there, or do i need it include /fish and
> then exclude /fish/guppie, to get the heirarchy?
>
> i do wish more tools used proto. the format is so nice.

oh, you already know what i'm going to suggest, so
just get to it!

russ: i don't think in understand your motivating case.  if
you want to flatten /some/long/path/target to just target,
why can't you just cd there?  there must be some other part
i haven't gotten yet.

- erik

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[john]

Erik Quanstrom wrote:
> On Mon Mar  9 23:30:22 EDT 2009, anothy@gmail.com wrote:
>> that seems a little awkward. erik's suggestion is what i
>> think i'd really like. rog's would be okay, although still
>> somewhatawkward, were i on plan 9; since i'm not, i think
>> i have russ's option. so with -x, say i had a tree:
>>
>> /dog
>> /cat
>> /fish/guppie
>> /fish/clown
>> /pig
>>
>> and i wanted /dog, /cat, and /fish/clown. would three
>> includes be sufficent there, or do i need it include /fish and
>> then exclude /fish/guppie, to get the heirarchy?
>>
>> i do wish more tools used proto. the format is so nice.
>
> oh, you already know what i'm going to suggest, so
> just get to it!
>

kenfs? ;)


John

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[erik quanstrom]

> > oh, you already know what i'm going to suggest, so
> > just get to it!
> >
>
> kenfs? ;)

no kenfs is just sun, wed, fri, sat.  monday is nupas day.
(five minutes left!)  and tuesday i suggest atazz.  i try to
lay low on thursday.

- erik

Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees?

[Russ Cox]

i think

include fish/clown
exclude fish/*

and then vac fish dog pig
would be fine.
i haven't tried this,
but i know there are
some vac users who
use -x quite a bit.

russ