Wayne Davison wrote: > On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 12:12:16PM +0100, Tony Finch wrote: > > This is because of race conditions in finish_transfer() which mean > > that it does not update files atomically. > > There is a diff in the "patches" dir named early-chmod.diff > that changes > this behavior. It sets the permissions prior to the robust_rename() > call, and the copy-when-rename-fails logic is extended to ensure that > these final permissions on the temp file don't interfere with rsync's > reading of the file for the copy. > > The only reason this patch hasn't already been applied is that I'm not > 100% sure of the reasons that rsync was written to do the > chmod() after > the rename(). For instance, do we need to worry about some strange > system that drops the setuid bits on rename()? Is there a (relevant) > system that prevents the rename() if the file is read-only? > (I seem to > recall that MS DOS has this behavior, but cygwin probably > hides it if it does.) > > Any comments on how portable it would be to apply the final > permissions before calling rename()?
Can we make up a test case that the build farm can execute? I know of no issues from the POSIX standard that would prevent applying this mod. PG -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
