X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to :references:message-id; q=dns; s=default; b=qwG7Qabk4YYrvu2Y8BEC 4xnfWzurpVHTrnsz1FuRS36gZnQwrPpWO8lKS7s/EMQymrCckRQ7Qshzb2huw25z 9VSBeNV++QOs6VolGsUE/gvOrSSLOXoyBUTceL8sUlfLh7W3PZbOi9S2xNAbfCMx JUxFfIaSiBuU4Cbjeid/p8g= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to :references:message-id; s=default; bh=+Zm556TpFcqERdzdOhPCGfUk9I I=; b=ysmmjx2rljHkNukgMub7IeHQ3v6KMEjDCl6wSC7NbAw6ukDVnHNS7V4dfJ PtFbf08HnLg170cf6EoafkOEPiuHant03gohlYEeC9IULbX3DkbmFvCmqGS+nmvr skFJq6elbpQKHKjqErDdDHLWVRsHI0NQM3Z72dedDK0JWQ2js= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*f:sk:ed7dd33, H*f:sk:1211985, H*i:sk:1211985, she X-HELO: lb3-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 17:42:31 +0100 From: Houder To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: snapshots (archive files) are too big ... Why? In-Reply-To: <1211985131.20160123172147@yandex.ru> References: <1211985131 DOT 20160123172147 AT yandex DOT ru> Message-ID: X-Sender: houder AT xs4all DOT nl (jIYHj8nTyMTtoQwPNUbIaQ==) User-Agent: XS4ALL Webmail X-IsSubscribed: yes Hi Andrey, On 2016-01-23 15:21, Andrey Repin wrote: > But this is actually a problem. Not sure ...extraction appears NOT to be a problem ... (yes, the same file is extracted multiple times). On the other hand, the "big" archive file might indicate there is room for improvement ... However, it might be so that the person who wrote the script believes that she/he can only rely on Lamport's clock: The "version" of the file, that survives the extraction process, will be the one that was last appended to the archive file ... http://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/tar.html#SEC59 See 4.2.2.2 Multiple Members with the Same Name. Of course, I am just guessing ... that is why I wrote: I am curious. Regards, Henri -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple