At the last developer meeting, in the context of looking after precious archives files, some concern was raised about the behaviour of the –i (in place) option to pmlogrewrite.
I’ve reviewed the code and the original implementation of –i seems robust to me.
1. temporary files are in the same directory as the input archive, so renaming does not imply any copying, just directory updates
2. the input archive is never overwritten
3. the input archive files is maintained via hard links (using a second set of temporary names) throughout and any error causes the old names to be reinstated
Feedback from others would be welcome, but I think the concerns raised at the meeting are not substantiated by the code.
Onto the next item …