rsnapshot

Re: [rsnapshot-discuss] rsnapshot-diff sorting by size? From: Matt McCutchen <matt@ma...> - 2008-01-28 14:51 Attachments: rsnapshot-diff-show-size.diff      On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 08:27 +0100, Janek Kozicki wrote: > Is it possible to modify rsnapshot-diff (a very useful command > nonetheless) so that it will write size of each file? > > If size would be written first (before +/-) it would be possible to > simply ` | sort -rn` by size. That would be great to find the > "important" changes, while ignoring a lot of small files changes (like > browser caches, sockets, or other junk). I like this idea, and I implemented an option to rsnapshot-diff to do this in the attached patch. Except I thought having a number in front of the + or - looked ugly, so I put the number after it, so you use "sort -k 2 -rn" instead of "sort -rn". Matt

Re: [rsnapshot-discuss] rsnapshot-diff sorting by size? From: Janek Kozicki <janek_listy@wp...> - 2008-01-28 18:18 Matt McCutchen said: (by the date of Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:51:06 -0500) > I like this idea, and I implemented an option to rsnapshot-diff to do > this in the attached patch. Except I thought having a number in front > of the + or - looked ugly, so I put the number after it, so you use > "sort -k 2 -rn" instead of "sort -rn". wow, this is great! Thanks a lot. I've just started it - will see the output in about an hour :) -- Janek Kozicki |

Re: [rsnapshot-discuss] rsnapshot-diff sorting by size? From: Matt McCutchen <matt@ma...> - 2009-03-06 03:21 (Continuing the thread archived at http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=20080128082704.03568f0c%40szpak&forum_name=rsnapshot-discuss .) On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 09:51 -0500, Matt McCutchen wrote: > On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 08:27 +0100, Janek Kozicki wrote: > > Is it possible to modify rsnapshot-diff (a very useful command > > nonetheless) so that it will write size of each file? > > > > If size would be written first (before +/-) it would be possible to > > simply ` | sort -rn` by size. That would be great to find the > > "important" changes, while ignoring a lot of small files changes (like > > browser caches, sockets, or other junk). > > I like this idea, and I implemented an option to rsnapshot-diff to do > this in the attached patch. Except I thought having a number in front > of the + or - looked ugly, so I put the number after it, so you use > "sort -k 2 -rn" instead of "sort -rn". David, Shall I commit this enhancement? -- Matt

Re: [rsnapshot-discuss] rsnapshot-diff sorting by size? From: <hhullen@ak...> - 2009-03-06 07:08 Hallo, Matt, Du meintest am 05.03.09: >> I like this idea, and I implemented an option to rsnapshot-diff to >> do this in the attached patch. Except I thought having a number in >> front of the + or - looked ugly, so I put the number after it, so >> you use "sort -k 2 -rn" instead of "sort -rn". > Shall I commit this enhancement? Looks fine. Viele Gruesse! Helmut

Re: [rsnapshot-discuss] rsnapshot-diff sorting by size? From: David Cantrell <david@ca...> - 2009-03-06 12:53 On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:21:52PM -0500, Matt McCutchen wrote: > On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 09:51 -0500, Matt McCutchen wrote: > > I like this idea, and I implemented an option to rsnapshot-diff to do > > this in the attached patch. Except I thought having a number in front > > of the + or - looked ugly, so I put the number after it, so you use > > "sort -k 2 -rn" instead of "sort -rn". > Shall I commit this enhancement? Do it. -- David Cantrell | Hero of the Information Age You may now start misinterting what I just wrote, and attacking that misintertation.

2 messages have been excluded from this view by a project administrator.