GNU bug report logs - #47353
Numbered backups also need kept-new-versions else will grow out of control

Previous Next

Full log

Message #16 received at control <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Bob Proulx <bob <at> proulx.com>
To: Dan Jacobson <jidanni <at> jidanni.org>
Cc: 47353 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#47353: Numbered backups also need kept-new-versions else
 will grow out of control
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 18:25:56 -0600

tag 47353 + notabug
close 47353
thanks

Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Or (info "(coreutils) Backup options") should "admit" that "Numbered
> backups need to be trimmed occasionally by the user, lest the fill up
> the disk."

If the user has asked for them then any decision of the disposition of
them is up to the user.  If the user fills up their storage with them
then surely the user who created them will know what they did and will
be in the best position to decide what to do.

This type of thing is really both too general to document in detail
and too specific to document in detail at the same time.  It targets a
very specific thing, filling up the disk, with a very general purpose
action, copying files.  Both of which are plain actions not hidden or
subtle.  Consuming storage space by making copies is the primary
purpose of the cp command.

> And also mention in the manual that e.g., emacs has methods to trim
> these automatically, but coreutils hasn't implemented them yet.

Although cp, mv, and ln, may have used the same format as emacs for
the creation of backup files that does not mean that they *are* emacs
or that emacs is the preferred editor for users of cp and mv or that
knowledge of emacs is needed to use them.

I use Emacs and find it a superior editor for creating customized
domain specific editors.  But I don't think it should be referenced
from cp because the Emacs documentation is *HUGELY* more complicated.
If a new user is reading documentation on how to use cp then being
directed to climb the learning curve of Emacs would be way too much to
ask!  There is a user who I think would file a bug that it is too much
to ask if it were done that way.

The better thing to mention in relation to cp would be rm as those
would be natural siblings.  But they are actually siblings already.
So there seems no further need to cross-reference them additionally
redundantly again redundantly.

I am marking the ticket as closed as there seems nothing to actually
do here.  But as always more discussion is welcome and if it is
determined that something should be done then the ticket may be opened
again to track it.

Bob

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.