Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 15:12:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu> To: Darryl Okahata <darrylo@hpnmhjw.sr.hp.com> Cc: FreeBSD-Ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: using tar Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.95.960811151157.10084B-100000@thurston.eng.umd.edu> In-Reply-To: <199608111859.AA109699983@hpnmhjw.sr.hp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 11 Aug 1996, Darryl Okahata wrote: > > On Sun, 11 Aug 1996 patl@asimov.volant.org wrote: > > > An arguably better way to copy an entire directory tree within a single > > > machine is: > > > > > > cd <source_dir> > > > find . -depth -print | cpio -pdmv <dest_dir> > > > > You aren't the first person to point that method out (Joerg told me about > > it too) but I hadn't had any argument about it being 'arguably better'. > > Could/would you expand on that? > > I don't know if I'd call it better, but it does have the optional > advantage of being easy to filter/limit the files being copied (the > actual files, that is -- not the contents). You can just insert some > sed or perl commands into the pipeline to edit the list of files being > copied. I've occasionally used this technique to copy source trees, but > not any object files, archives, etc.. Tar does that same thing, on the command line without sed. More comments on why it's better ? ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.OSF.3.95.960811151157.10084B-100000>