A trailing slash after the source directory will copy the contents. No trailing slash copies the directory itself.

If the source contains directories and .txt, and I want all of them in to the external drive directory named 'new folder, should we slash or not slash in this case for the source?
"/media/asus/One Touch/new folder" has some older version of contents in "/media/asus/781E-438F"

Without the trailing slash the directory will be copied into the "new folder" directory like:
"/media/asus/One Touch/new folder/781E-438F"

With the trailing slash the contents of 781E-438F will be copied to "/media/asus/One Touch/new folder/"

If you want everything be sure to use the -r flag.

rsync has a huge amount of switches and options, I would suggest you two of them: -i and -n to see how does it work without actually doing anything.
https://superuser.com/questions/5766...ed-using-rsync

Thanks I used the 2nd option i.e with trailing slash at the end of 781E-438F. It was not a dry run and did the job. See below Haven't tried the first option you provided i.e. without trailing slash the directory. They look the same to me. I wouldn't mind doing a rsync dry-run on the first option so I can see the difference between the 2 options you provided i.e. without trailing slash the directory, would that look anything like this

Yes. It would show all as updates, because all files would be created under a new 781E-438F directory.

Is this a yes for "this is the correct way to do a dry run" without trailing slash at end of usb stick named 781E-438F?

no, all the short options started with a -, long options with --, so it is --dry-run.
But anyway, it is you who need it and you can check if it works for you as expected.

The dry-run option needs two dashes:
Then it will create and update
/media/asus/One Touch/new folder/781E-438F

Or perhaps you want to omit the "new folder":

1 members found this post helpful.

NO.
That command would create a directory "/media/asus/One Touch/new folder/781E=438F/ and place the content of the source in that folder. As used the source directory and its content would be copied to the destination.
Changing that to read would copy only the content of "781E-438F" to the directory "new folder".

You really need to read the man page for rsync, then make some trials to understand how that command interprets the source and what it does.
Source in the form "directory/" says to copy the content of "directory/" to the destination.
Source in the form "directory" says to copy the "directory" and all its content to the destination.

1 members found this post helpful.

A directory is a location for storing files on your computer?
A source directory is one that contains the source location for files on your computer?

If the source directory is the usb stick named "781E-438F" and
the contents are the folders within the usb stick "781E-438F" then
what benefit is there to rysnc the source if I know already the source of what I am copying over?

In my case the source directory is the files within a usb named "781E-438F", is that correct? If yes, then how is that any different from just rsync the contents of usb named "781E-438F"?

If I had instead went ahead and done rsync source directory plus the contents with the usb named "781E-438F" I would have ended up with what as a bonus (other than the contents)? The code for that would have looked like this below: Would there have been any additional benefit conferred upon me if I had went with rynsc source directory plus the contents (as above) vs just rysnc the contents (which is what I went for)?

I don't really understand, copying a directory means you will create another directory somewhere else (using the same name) and copy all the content from the source directory to the target directory.
Copying the content is almost the same, just you won't create a new [target] directory, but you specify an existing one.

The name in this case is the name of the usb stick which in my case is "781E-438F". All content you copy over will end up looking like this e.g. I was trying to say, I don't see how copying the source directory name (781E-438F) along with everything else is important? I don't see why I need it.

Instead of debating this endlessly just try what was suggested to see for yourself which fits what you want to happen.

First try copying the data using and look at the content of "/media/asus/new folder" to see what exactly happened. (It should contain a directory "/media/asus/new folder/781E-438F")
Then repeat using and again look at the content of "/media/asus/new folder". This time it should contain only the content of the source 781E-438F directory. (assuming you cleaned out the data copied in the first time)

No one is saying to copy the directory and content. We are explaining how rsync works and saying that if you only want the content to be copied then you must use the form that has the trailing / on the source directory name (my second example here)

In the linux/unix world everything is [mapped to] a file or directory, the OS itself works only on files and directories. So the question is if you want to appear the name (781E-438F) on the target side (as a directory). It depends on you, if you need it or if you find it annoying.

1 members found this post helpful.