| 1 |
Another argument in favour of cp in Linux: holes in sparse files are |
| 2 |
kept correctly, whereas using tar they are not. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
It is curious that this is very OS dependent. |
| 5 |
In FreeBSD, with cp, holes always go away, using tar, or better |
| 6 |
dump/restore is a way to keep all file attributes. |
| 7 |
In Linux, cp -a seems to be better for archives than tar, because it |
| 8 |
preserves these properties better, even across devices. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
2008/12/16 Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com>: |
| 11 |
> Daniel Troeder wrote: |
| 12 |
>> Am Dienstag, den 16.12.2008, 03:15 -0600 schrieb Dale: |
| 13 |
[...] |
| 14 |
>> While this will work perfectly well, this command is a waste of |
| 15 |
>> resources. The compression ("-z") makes locally no sense, and there is |
| 16 |
>> no need to tar the data (which will basically just concat files). You |
| 17 |
>> will get the exact same result with |
| 18 |
>> # cp -a /source /dest |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> If the FS has been formatted before, no fragmentation should occur in |
| 21 |
>> every scenario, as long as no parallelism is used while copying, because |
| 22 |
>> each file will be created and filled with data one after another. |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> Bye, |
| 25 |
>> Daniel |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Cool. Then I can just use cp -a and let her rip. I plan to redo my |
| 30 |
> partitions so I will have to reformat the partitions too. I guess this |
| 31 |
> will be as good as it gets. I'll also report the results of fragck when |
| 32 |
> I get this done. Just curious myself. I think I will skip shake this |
| 33 |
> time tho. ;-) |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> Thanks much. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> Dale |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
Miguel Ramos <2008@××××××××××××.name> |
| 43 |
GnuPG ID 0xA006A14C |
Archives