3 ms·

Adding pv to a tar|ssh pipeline is simpler than just passing -P to rsync? I must disagree.

klodolph 7y ago
Maybe I wasn't clear about my complaint. My complaint is that rsync --progress sucks, I'm not complaining that it's hard to use.
- darkpuma 7y ago
  I don't like the --no-h change they made to the --progress format (mentioned in another comment) because it broke my parsing once, but otherwise I don't really see a problem with it and I expect most people have never tried to parse it. What's so bad about --progress? Edit: --progress also tells you how many files rsync has been told to sync, and of those, how many are remaining. 2384908 100% 57.52MB/s 0:00:00 (xfr#1, to-chk=7/11) e.g. transfer #1 out of 11 files or directories to check, with 7 remaining.
  - klodolph 7y ago
    --progress gives you only the progress of individual file transfers.
    - sirn 7y ago
      --info=progress2 actually gives you the progress of the whole transfer (but I don't think you can do both). You can use --info=name0,progress2 if you don't care about individual files scrolling the terminal.
      - klodolph 7y ago
        Seems like this user-hostile interface could have been averted if they gave rsync a "porcelain" mode, since --progress is frozen so it doesn't break scripts.
        darkpuma 7y ago
        I think you're really exaggerating the severity of what is fundamentally just a minor matter of personal taste. (I say this as somebody who's written a GUI wrapper around rsync to, among other things, implement my own progress bar. So I agree with the general principle of writing porcelain around rsync.) (Incidentally --progress has actually changed in a way that breaks (my) scripts in the past; the version that ships with MacOS and the latest version exhibit different behavior by default. It would be nice if there was a better way. If rsync followed the ffmpeg model of foremost being a library with a standard command line interface, I think that could be ideal.)

Maybe I wasn't clear about my complaint. My complaint is that rsync --progress sucks, I'm not complaining that it's hard to use.

darkpuma 7y ago
I don't like the --no-h change they made to the --progress format (mentioned in another comment) because it broke my parsing once, but otherwise I don't really see a problem with it and I expect most people have never tried to parse it. What's so bad about --progress? Edit: --progress also tells you how many files rsync has been told to sync, and of those, how many are remaining. 2384908 100% 57.52MB/s 0:00:00 (xfr#1, to-chk=7/11) e.g. transfer #1 out of 11 files or directories to check, with 7 remaining.
- klodolph 7y ago
  --progress gives you only the progress of individual file transfers.
  - sirn 7y ago
    --info=progress2 actually gives you the progress of the whole transfer (but I don't think you can do both). You can use --info=name0,progress2 if you don't care about individual files scrolling the terminal.
    - klodolph 7y ago
      Seems like this user-hostile interface could have been averted if they gave rsync a "porcelain" mode, since --progress is frozen so it doesn't break scripts.
      - darkpuma 7y ago
        I think you're really exaggerating the severity of what is fundamentally just a minor matter of personal taste. (I say this as somebody who's written a GUI wrapper around rsync to, among other things, implement my own progress bar. So I agree with the general principle of writing porcelain around rsync.) (Incidentally --progress has actually changed in a way that breaks (my) scripts in the past; the version that ships with MacOS and the latest version exhibit different behavior by default. It would be nice if there was a better way. If rsync followed the ffmpeg model of foremost being a library with a standard command line interface, I think that could be ideal.)