[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bacula-devel] Bacula Status


Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> * Kern Sibbald schrieb am 04.10.08 um 16:26 Uhr:
>> Hello Marc,
> 
> Hello Kern,
> 
>> I am sorry, but from what you wrote below, I really am not sure what you like 
>> and what you do not like.
> 
> I did not want to confuse you ;)
> I assumed that things like WildDir work in Include as well as in
> Exclude sections... which is wrong. I confused the things a bit, sorry.
> Please read on.
> 
>> There are two things that need to be decided separately:
>>
>> 1. Where to place the directive
>>     - Options section
>>     - Include section
>>     - Exclude section
> 
> I think this depends on how the directive will work / what you can
> do with it:
> 
> If you could use it similar to wilddir for example, than it could
> be used to include as well as to exclude directories (exclude=yes)
> and then it would be best to have the new directive in the Options
> section, right?
> 
> These examples show how it would work then:
> ######################################################
> # use control file to exclude dirs:
> Include {
>   Options {
>     Ignore Dir = .no_backup
>     Exclude=yes
>   }
>   File = /
> }

I think having the directive within the Exclude directive is much better.

> or
> 
> # use control file to include dirs:
> Include {
>   Options {
>     Ignore Dir = .please_back_me_up
>   }

That seems very odd to me.  Is that what you meant?

I think it's better to have:

     Include Only Dirs Containing = .please_back_me_up

if you are trying to exclude most of a tree except for a few specific 
directories.


>   Options {
>     RegExFile = ".*"
>     Exclude = yes
>   }
>   File = /
> }
> ######################################################
> 
> If it will be to much work or not worth the work to put it into the
> Options section than I would vote for having it in the Exclude
> section as this new directive is about excluding dirs:
> 
> FileSet {
>   Name = xxx
>   Include {
>     ...
>   }
>   Exclude {
>     Ignore Dir = .no_backup
>   }
> }

That seems to make more sense, but I still like the "Exclude { Dirs 
Containing = .no_backup" must better.

> because this directive is about excluding directories and not
> including then.
> 
> 
>> 2. The name of the option.
>>
>> The name of the directive clearly can be different depending on the section it 
>> goes in.  
> 
> Yes.
> 
> We might try some brainstorming here:
> 
> # Options section:
>   Options {
>     
>     Ignore Control File  = .no_backup
>     Exclude Control File = .no_backup
>     Ignore Flag File     = .no_backup
>     Exclude Flag File    = .no_backup
>     Ignore Dir Flag File = .no_backup
>     ...
>   }

     Exclude Dirs Containing = .no_backup
> 
> 
> # Exclude section:
>   Exclude {
>     Control File = .no_backup
>     Flag File    = .no_backup
>     ...
>   }



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-devel mailing list
Bacula-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel


This mailing list archive is a service of Copilotco.