On onsdag 24 februari 2016 kl. 12:51:37 CET David Sterba wrote: > Is it supposed to match only full path or also substrings? The way > it's implemented it can match just part of the path but I'm not sure > if this is intended or not. > > Paths in path-from-file: > > /a/b/c/d > > In filesystem: > > /backup1/a/b/c/d > /backup2/a/b/c/d neither /backup1/a/b/c/d nor /backup2/a/b/c/d are substrings of /a/b/c/ d, so they wouldn't match; /a, /a/b, /a/b/c would match, so the hierarchy ./a/b/c/ is already created where data is rescued to, when d is encountered by search_dir(). Thinking about it now, /b/c/d in the filesystem would also match, though. That's clearly wrong. > I'd expect that the path would need to match absolutelly. > Alternatively, we could do relative path matching, so: > > Paths in path-from-file: > > a/b/c/d > > would match both /backup[12]. > > Either way i find the matching rules ambiguous and not documented. > Please clarify. Agreed, its ambiguous. And the code unclear. I'll rethink it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
