Jeff, I did set the policy to permissive. If I get some time I'll try again.
Craig On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 10:30 PM <backu...@kosowsky.org> wrote: > Thanks Craig. > The --specials now works (and I agree with both you and Michael that > it is not useful... but it validates that the restore is 'perfect' as > far as rsync is concerned) > > Regarding selinux, you can turn it on in 'permissive' (non-enforcing) > mode in which case it shouldn't do anything other than create messages > of selinux policy violations... but it shouldn't block (or otherwise > affect any parts of your running system) > > Check out the following for some details: > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/changing-selinux-states-and-modes/ > > Craig Barratt wrote at about 18:26:34 -0700 on Saturday, May 23, 2020: > > While I agree with Michael that restoring sockets isn't that useful > (since > > they are only created by a process that is receiving connections on a > > unix-domain socket), I did fix the bug > > < > https://github.com/backuppc/rsync-bpc/commit/3802747ab70c8d1a41f051ac9610b899352b5271 > > > > that causes them to be incorrectly restored by rsync_bpc. > > > > I'm quite unfamiliar with selinux attributes. Is it possible to add > > selinux attributes to a file (with setfilecon) when selinux is disabled? > > Unfortunately my attempt to turn selinux on didn't go well - my machine > > didn't boot into a usable state, so I'm not willing to turn on selinux. > > > > Craig > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 8:26 PM Michael Stowe < > > michael.st...@member.mensa.org> wrote: > > > > > On 2020-05-22 16:49, backu...@kosowsky.org wrote: > > > > Michael Stowe wrote at about 22:18:50 +0000 on Friday, May 22, 2020: > > > > > On 2020-05-22 11:42, backu...@kosowsky.org wrote: > > > > > > 1. Sockets are restored as regular files not special files --> > > > > BUG? > > > > > > > > > > Why would one back up a socket? > > > > I am testing the fidelity of the backup/restore cycle.. > > > >> > > > > > If you really think this is sensible, you should be able to > > > > accomplish > > > > > it with "--devices --specials" as part of your rsync command > lines. > > > > > From the symptoms, you have this in backup but not restore. > > > > > > > > Actually, in the original text (which you snipped), I shared my > > > > rsync_bpc commands for both 'dump' and 'restore', which include the > > > > '-D' flag (actually it's the default in the config.pl for both > rsync > > > > dump and restore)... and '-D' is *equivalent* to '--devices > > > > --specials' > > > > > > > > And since I suspected some readers might miss that, I even noted in > > > > the text that: > > > > "Also, special files (--specials) should be included under the -D > > > > flag that I use for both rsync dump and restore commands (see > > > > below)" > > > > > > > > Hence, why I suggested this is a *BUG* vs. user error or lack of > > > > knowledge :) > > > > > > You've mistaken my point -- sure, the -D flag is there, but it's > > > behaving like it isn't. Let's review: > > > > > > --devices > > > This option causes rsync to transfer character and block > device > > > files to the remote system to recreate these devices. > This > > > option has no effect if the receiving rsync is not run as > the > > > super-user (see also the --super and --fake-super options). > > > > > > Naturally this begs the question as to whether you're running it as > the > > > super-user, and if you've seen the options as referred to in the man > > > page, which I've quoted above. > > > >
_______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
