Confirm or rollback this edit

Question

Here I (and someone else) have approved an edit into the most upvoted answer, which was suggested by comment at 2017, but later I saw that this edit (--progress) exists already in this answer from 2013 and this answer from 2014. Should this be reverted as it copies an existing answer?

Answer 1

I think it's fine. After all, the end result here is that the accepted answer (which will be shown first since it is accepted) is now more correct. Nobody copied anyone else and what we really care about is that the next user who has this question will find a good answer.

So, since the edit makes the answer better and is actually necessary (without it, the answer is wrong as there's no progress2 option), I don't see any problem with it.

Answer 2

I think that posts can do with a further edit explaining the difference between --progress, --info=progress2 and --info=progress. All three are valid, and all three show different sets of information:

% mkdir foo; touch foo/{a..c}      
% rsync --progress -a foo bar      
sending incremental file list
created directory bar
foo/
foo/a
              0 100%    0.00kB/s    0:00:00 (xfr#1, to-chk=2/4)
foo/b
              0 100%    0.00kB/s    0:00:00 (xfr#2, to-chk=1/4)
foo/c
              0 100%    0.00kB/s    0:00:00 (xfr#3, to-chk=0/4)
% rm -r bar

% rsync --info=progress -a foo bar
              0 100%    0.00kB/s    0:00:00 (xfr#1, to-chk=2/4)
              0 100%    0.00kB/s    0:00:00 (xfr#2, to-chk=1/4)
              0 100%    0.00kB/s    0:00:00 (xfr#3, to-chk=0/4)
% rm -r bar                       

(Note that --progress is actually something like --info=flist,name,progress.)

% rsync --info=progress2 -a foo bar
              0 100%    0.00kB/s    0:00:00 (xfr#3, to-chk=0/4)

Some might be interested in the first form, but often enough I'm just interested in overall progress (the third form).