X-Git-Url: https://fleuret.org/cgi-bin/gitweb/gitweb.cgi?p=finddup.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=finddup.1;h=2da4ee3dc12e5b24d40182090bd9cfca0d4e2943;hp=e262386a1ec035946a50828f69cf6582b3320429;hb=8c988a4aca00501c9a9d53f4ff228dcb0bce0acb;hpb=ab7b6e26f35ac1dfc88d9bf1e09dd289a30ea782

diff --git a/finddup.1 b/finddup.1
index e262386..2da4ee3 100644
--- a/finddup.1
+++ b/finddup.1
@@ -10,12 +10,13 @@ finddup \- Find files common to two directories (or not)
 
 .SH "SYNOPSIS"
 
-\fBfinddup\fP [OPTION]... DIR1 [[and:|not:]DIR2]
+\fBfinddup\fP [OPTION]... [DIR1 [[and:|not:]DIR2]]
 
 .SH "DESCRIPTION"
 
-With a single directory argument, \fBfinddup\fP prints the duplicated
-files found in it.
+With one directory as argument, \fBfinddup\fP prints the duplicated
+files found in it. If no directory is provided, it uses the current
+one as default.
 
 With two directories, it prints either the files common to both DIR1
 and DIR2 or, with the `not:' prefix, the ones present in DIR1 and not
@@ -66,20 +67,24 @@ files with same inode are considered as different
 
 None known, probably many. Valgrind does not complain though.
 
-The current algorithm is dumb, that is it does not use any hashing of
-the file content. I tried md5 on the whole file, which is not
-satisfactory because files are often never read entirely hence the md5
-can not be properly computed. I also tried XOR of the first 4, 16 and
-256 bytes with rejection as soon as one does not match. Did not help
-either.
+The current algorithm is dumb, as it does not use any hashing of the
+file content.
+
+Here are the things I tried, which did not help at all: (1) Computing
+md5s on the whole files, which is not satisfactory because files are
+often never read entirely hence the md5s can not be properly computed,
+(2) computing XOR of the first 4, 16 and 256 bytes with rejection as
+soon as one does not match, (3) reading parts of the files of
+increasing sizes so that rejection could be done with a small fraction
+when possible, (4) using mmap instead of open/read.
 
 .SH "WISH LIST"
 
 The format of the output should definitely be improved. Not clear how.
 
 Their could be some fancy option to link two instances of the command
-running on different machines to reduce network disk accesses. Again,
-this may not help much, for the reason given above.
+running on different machines to reduce network disk accesses. This
+may not help much though.
 
 .SH "EXAMPLES"