Marc Espie <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 03:09:48PM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > > > A completely other thing is to conclude that two *arbitrary* pieces of > > data are the same only because they have the same hash. Arbitrary > > means here that the one was not a copy of the other. And this is what > > rsync seems to do as far as I understand the wikipedia web-page. > > The probability of an electrical failure in your hard drive causing > it to munge the file, or of a bug in the software using that file > is much higher than this happening.
This is a conjecture. Do you have a proof that the probability is so small? For me it is difficult to accept it. Is this conjecture used elsewhere? About my original intention: to get a copy of the repository. Does the repository only grow with new files? Old files never change? Can I hence expect that cvsync never rely on the above questionable conjecture? Even if the transmition for whatever reason is interrupted and I try again? Is there an alternative for downloading the repository without the conjecture? I dont like rsync and similars!!!! Thanks Rodrigo.
