Key emphasis on 'appears' -- I was going from information I could find online without building the code [no time] with the hopes that someone more knowledgeable would step in and provide additional information. Martin did so [thank you!!!] and I agree -- no way can rsyncX be used as a replacement for the rsync in Fink.
Given the behavior of rsyncX, I would recommend against packaging it at all until some of the very basic bugs that appear to be in the software are addressed. b.bum On Wednesday, July 10, 2002, at 04:10 PM, Martin Costabel wrote: > Bill Bumgarner wrote: >> I briefly looked at the rsync as provided by macosxlabs.org. In my >> opinion, the key criteria for replacing the rsync package as distributed >> by Fink are two fold: >> Compatibility >> It appears that rsync+HFS (for lack of a better moniker) maintains >> compatibility with the non-extended rsync. > > Unfortunately, this is not true. rsyncX works only if it sits at both > ends of the line. If you have standard rsync at the receiving side (OSX > or other Unix), rsyncX copies the *resource fork* and not the data fork! > This gives garbage results, of course: Files without resource fork (this > is the standard for the Unix side of OSX, even in HFS+) result in zero > byte copies, for example. > > This is quite incredible, but I repeated the test several times with > various machines under OSX, Solaris, and Linux. Maybe there is some > command line switch to change this behavior, but if there is, I haven't > found it. The documentation that comes with (the sources of) rsyncX is > the one of standard rsync; I didn't see anything about rsyncX in there. > > I didn't touch the GUI installer, because > a) there are no sources available (not very GPLy) > b) it clobbers /usr/bin/rsync, which is very bad style (TM). > Maybe it comes with documentation? On the web site there is virtually no > documentation either. > >> As well, it doesn't appear to be a problem to build this version of >> rsync. > > Yes, it compiles OK with your info file if one just changes the source > URL. > >> And it doesn't appear to break when talking within a non-extended >> version of rsync. > > Did you look at the result? If it worked for you, I'd like to see how you > did it. > >> As such, it would be much more attractive if the HFS extensions were >> included in the rsync development trunk. > > Until this happens, I'd be very careful before replacing the rsync > command by something not really trustworthy. > > -- Martin > > b.bum In cyberspace, no one can hear you laugh. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Two, two, TWO treats in one. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Fink-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
