[<<]Message[>>]    [<<]Author[>>]    [<<]Subject[>>]    [<<]Thread[>>]

Number   :  4695
Date     :  2003-06-01
Author   :  james sadler
Subject  :  Re: Exclusion Question
Size(KB) :  3


 Frankly that clone switch is one of the best
features in XXCOPY when it is deliberately used as a
deletion tool. I have some deletion tools and none of
them work as well as cloning an empty directory onto a
folder. It would be a sin to take that capability out
of XXCOPY.
--- Kan Yabumoto  wrote:
> edlight wrote:
> 
> >I've been using an older version of xxcopy, and
> just
> >downloaded the new one but haven't installed it.
> >
> >My question:
> >
> >I've discovered that when using /clone and /ex,
> >if I put a file such as "pagefile.sys" on one
> >line in the text file of exclusions, if that file
> >is not in the source it will be deleted in the
> target.
> >
> >So I've had to put a dummy file in the source.
> 
> The XXCOPY behavior you are observing is what we
> should all
> expect. It is not a bug.
> 
> /CLONE is to make a duplicate directory as closely
> as possible.
> If there is anything extra in the destination, it
> should be
> removed. That is what the /ZY component the /CLONE
> switch
> (a combination of many switches) is designed to do.
> 
> The /ZY switch does not get affected by the
> exclusion list.
> The exclusion list (like almost all other
> file-selection
> switches) works on the objects in the source
> directory.
> 
> We have heard a number of users' wish that there
> should be
> an exclusion mechanism that applies to the /Z (and
> possibly
> on /RD and /RX) action.
> 
> Anyway, our "official" justification for the
> exclusion
> list to be applied only to the objects in the source
> directory is consistent to all other file-selection
> mechanisms that are also to modify objects in the
> source.
> 
> On the other hand, in the case of the exclusion
> items,
> I personally see more advantages (than disadvantages
> if
> any) to change the behavior of the exclusion items
> to
> apply on both the source and the destination. To be
> honest, I can even accept the "exceptional" behavior
> with the exclusion items. But, we still do not have
> the courage to change that for two reasons:
> 
> 1. possible confusion that may arise by applying
> the
> exclusion items on both sides while all other
> switches (most notably the inclusion items
> which
> should not apply to the /Z action).
> 
> 2. the change would break some existing batch
> files
> in strange ways.
> 
> So, probably the best remedy for this situation
> would be to create a separate set of exclusion
> mechanism
> specifically for the /Z (and possibly for /RD and
> /RX)
> actions. But, this is a can of worm (what about all
> other switches that would affect the items in the
> destination in similar fashion?)
> 
> Lastly, let me point out that the /CLONE operation
> is to duplicate the contents of the source directory
> in the destination as closely as possible. Wishing
> exceptions in this regard is already a contradiction
> to the purpose of /CLONE.
> 
> In conclusion, creating a dummy file to nullify the
> effect of the /Z action is a valid and useful
> technique.
> 
> I would like to listen to other arguments on this
> issue
> because I'm still somewhat ambivalent.
> 
> Kan Yabumoto
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com



This message if part of XXCOPY's message Archive.
The archive contains all the messages posted at Yahoo!Groups: XXCOPY.