On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 11:53:15AM -0500, Steven Pritchard wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 11:59:21PM -0400, Charles R. Anderson wrote: > > >From a mirroring perspective, it is much more efficient to have an > > all-updates directory containing all the real files, and a > > latest-updates directory containing only symlinks to the newest files > > in the other directory. That way rsync can sync the symlinks with > > --delete and you don't have to download the files again when they > > become obsolete and would otherwise be moved between directories. > > But then there wouldn't be anything to --exclude easily (for mirrors > concerned about space). Sure there would. Just download the latest-updates directory, following the symlink targets. > To avoid the multiple-download problem, when the new update appears, a > hard link to the old update could be created in the obsolete-updates > directory. The updates directory copy could then be deleted a week > later (or whatever). As long as mirrors are using rsync -H and > mirroring regularly, they'd never need to re-download an update. Not everyone uses rsync... Symlinks could be supported by ftp mirroring.
