>
>
> >
> > > I guess I could write an initial protocol specification - but it would
> > > not be complete and I wouldn't be able to relicense my library to
> > > LGPL anyway.
> > >
> > > So I guess I have convinced myself that it is not worth the effort
> > > trying. Time is probably better spent
Begin forwarded message:
From: Karel Kulhavy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 7 March 2006 18:01:43
To: Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Delete some excluded files in rsync
Hello
I suggest that a feature be added into rsync. That one could
separately
specify excluded files that should
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 14:58 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A year ago we discussed the strength of the MD4 hash used by rsync and
librsync, and one of the points mentioned was that only collision
attacks are known on MD4.
Could you please forward this into the bug tracker so it's not lost?
John Van Essen wrote:
Off list to rsync list owner (feel free to reply on-list if you like):
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005, Dag Wieers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm not sure what the policy of this list is and I bet everyone has a spam
filter, so nobody might have noticed, but we got spammed.
The policy
On 5 Jan 2005, Rusty Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 18:24 +0100, Robert Lemmen wrote:
hi rusty,
i read on some webpage about rsync and debian that you wrote a patch to
rsync that let's it uses heuristics when deciding which local file to
use. could you tell me
On 7 Jun 2004, Guo jing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for your answer!
Yes,my question is that if we can get a good result when the file is
changing while it is being copied by rsync
In my test, if the file is being augmented while it been copied using
rsync.I can get a normal copy
On 1 Jun 2004, John Summerfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The jitterbug link on http://rsync.samba.org/nobugs.html no longer works. I
suggest it either be fixed or removed.
Thanks, fixed.
You make bug-reporting needlessly difficult, I think. I dislike the need to
subscribe to a
On 30 May 2004, Dennis R. Gesker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note: I don't know if this is a problem withe I20 drivers or Rsync so
I'm submitting to both the Kernel Bugzilla and the Rsync mailing list. I
couldn't find a bugzilla for Rsync. I hope this was the correct way to
submit this issue.
On 31 May 2004, Guo jing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hello,
I am a student in China.I like the linux and usually use the rsync to
backup my documents. Last week when I use it,I find a question I want to
discuss with you.
The condition is like this: The source file that I want to rsync to
Date: Tue Jun 1 09:08:29 2004
Author: mbp
Update of /data/cvs/rsyncweb
In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv5025
Modified Files:
nobugs.html
Log Message:
Clean up mention of mailing list.
Revisions:
nobugs.html 1.8 = 1.9
Date: Tue Jun 1 02:07:38 2004
Author: mbp
Update of /data/cvs/rsyncweb
In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv10518
Modified Files:
features.html
Log Message:
typo
Revisions:
features.html 1.2 = 1.3
The rsync faq-o-matic was broken during the recent machine migration.
Since there was relatively little useful content and a lot of
unanswered or pointless questions, I am going to remove the links to
it.
If anyone feels like maintaining an FAQ please do so.
--
Martin
signature.asc
Date: Fri May 28 02:25:19 2004
Author: mbp
Update of /data/cvs/rsyncweb
In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv15115
Modified Files:
header.html
Log Message:
remove dead faq-o-matic
Revisions:
header.html 1.14 = 1.15
- Forwarded message from Paulo da Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: Paulo da Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: rsync: Request for a feature
Date: Sun, 02 May 2004 17:09:11 +0100
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040317
X-Spam-Status:
On 23 Apr 2004, Jim Salter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a test message - my apologies for it, but everything I send is
getting bounced.
Our spamfilter was a little too hasty. It should be OK now.
--
Martin
--
To unsubscribe or change options:
Just as background information: our spam filter caught 14000 attempted
spams in the last two weeks. Suggestions on blocking more are welcome
but the vast majority is already blocked. I think we removed the
@samba.org whitelist.
--
Martin
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--
To
Date: Mon Jan 12 00:49:28 2004
Author: mbp
Update of /data/cvs/rsyncweb
In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv6859
Modified Files:
lists.html
Log Message:
Fix link to Smart Questions document.
Revisions:
lists.html 1.5 = 1.6
On 4 Dec 2003, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know that with ssh I can issue the -i command to use a different identity.
Is there anyway to use the -i command with rsync and ssh? Thank
you.
Use the IdentityFile and Host keywords in your ssh_config:
Host suzy-alt-key
HostName
Date: Thu Dec 4 10:59:33 2003
Author: mbp
Update of /data/cvs/rsyncweb
In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv18506
Modified Files:
index.html
Log Message:
Clarify that the problem is with 2.5.6 *and earlier*.
Add CVE index.
Revisions:
index.html 1.17 = 1.18
On 24 Nov 2003, Dirk Pape [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Martin Pool,
I tried to ask via the rsync-mailing list but never got an answer. So I
contact you directly.
I refer to the rsync syntax
rsync [OPTION]... SRC [SRC]... DEST
with more than one SRC, which is mentioned in the man
On 30 Oct 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was hoping that since you guys are the authors to rsync that
you could answer a simple question for me.
I'm trying to transfer files via the rsh/rexec protocol by
remotely executing a cat command, i.e. cat foo.txt
and then sending data through
That's an interesting idea.
As a temporary measure you might different tcp ports rather than
module names to distinguish different services, and then use tcp
redirectors.
--
Martin
--
To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read:
On 22 Oct 2003, Morten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm running RH9, 2.4.20-18.9. Each night, the server mounts
an external FAT32 disk using firewire, and performs backups
to it using rsync.
Twice within the past 3 months, the backup process has resulted
in machine crash (complete
On 9 Sep 2003 Greger Cronquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
See also unison, http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/ which does
exactly this (and synchronizes using the rsync algorithm).
Yes, Unison is very cool. I hadn't realized that it detected renames
though.
--
Martin
--
To
On 9 Sep 2003 Jon Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually you can guess by looking at the allocated-blocks measure,
and use this to guess whether it's preallocated zeros or sparse,
which might be useful for backups. But there is no way around
reading the blocks.
Sure. Bummer; that's a
On 26 Aug 2003 jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 09:25:41AM +1200, Steve Wray wrote:
Hi there,
I have been asked to develop a system for keeping
a bunch of machines remotely configured and updated.
The client has asked for this to be implemented using rsync.
On 9 Sep 2003 Saylor, Ted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I find rsync an excellent tool when I need to move multi-gigabyte
filesystems, because I can do most of the copying during the week -
then a quick cleanup sweep in our 4 hour outage window.
I do need to somehow get the atime's to copy
On 9 Sep 2003 Max Kipness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can someone tell me what the problem is here. I am doing an rsync on a
sendmail spool directory to a folder that is a samba mount.
What do you mean by a samba mount? A filesystem mounted over smbfs?
Why is rsync trying to change owner?
On 7 Sep 2003 Marc MERLIN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if this has been requested before, but I would really
like for rsync to compute an md5sum for each file at the source and
destination (with a flag turned off by default of course), and it
would realize that I renamed files at
On 2 Sep 2003 francis.mit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bonjour,
Today, I use rsync for updating some 40 Debian/Linux box, rsync is
great.
So, now, I'll need to update a whole disk or partition (NTFS) with an
image or an other disk or part. (case multiboot system),
can'I hope rsync do this
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:49:36 -0400
Hardy Merrill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
rsync -avv [EMAIL PROTECTED]::test-secret/one_secret
/tmp/rsync_test_secret
Yes, that's better.
Although 'man rsync' does technically describe this
in the CONNECTING TO AN RSYNC SERVER OVER A REMOTE SHELL
PROGRAM
On 22 Aug 2003 16:11:21 +0200
Lars Bungum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greetings!
I'm experiencing these problems as described in this mail:
---
From: Thomas Quinot ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Rsync 2.5.5: FreeBSD mknod can't create FIFO's
This is the only article in this thread
On 8 Jun 2003, Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
regarding librsync... It is still in sort-of-active development on
SourceForge by a variety of developers... a new release is waiting in
CVS for me to finally get around to releasing it, but I'm busy on a big
contract at the moment so
On 25 Jun 2003, Wayne Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 10:34:38AM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
There is no mtime for xattrs, so they are transferred every time as
part of the file list.
One possibly better solution would be to create some kind of CRC of the
xattr data
rsync-2.5.6/flist.c xa/flist.c
--- rsync-2.5.6/flist.c 2003-01-19 05:00:23.0 +1100
+++ xa/flist.c 2003-06-25 08:29:52.0 +1000
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
/*
Copyright (C) Andrew Tridgell 1996
Copyright (C) Paul Mackerras 1996
- Copyright (C) 2001, 2002 by Martin Pool [EMAIL
On 24 Jun 2003, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't much care for sending the xattrs as part of the file list.
Even the 4KB ext[23] _currently_ limit it to is huge.
I would have preferred to do it doing the regular transfer, rather
than in the file list, but that seemed to make it a
On 24 Jun 2003, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That lack of an mtime for xattr could well cause
difficulties for backup systems as well. Perhaps a note to
the filesystems people is in order. The problem is that you
can't use mtime for these. It really needs its own
timestamp, perhaps
On 17 Jun 2003, Rogier Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oops. Missed one line in the last patch
Thankyou. That looks good.
If we're going to make this more accurate it might be worthwhile to
actually look at how long we really did sleep for, and use that to
adjust time_to_sleep rather than
On 18 Jun 2003, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 09:09:59PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
On 17 Jun 2003, Rogier Wolff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oops. Missed one line in the last patch
Thankyou. That looks good.
If we're going to make this more
On 4 Feb 2003, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes but i'd like to hear from some people who know network
performance programming.
I know only enough to be mildly dangerous. :-)
I don't think you can do this optimally in userspace, because there is
lots of buffering between what we
On 15 May 2003, Paul Slootman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't really see that doing smaller writes will lead to packets being
padded, unless you're doing really small writes (ref. the ATM 48-byte
packets); the TCP and IP headers will always be added, which means that
the extra overhead of
On 16 Jun 2003, Lapo Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Each time I send a message to the ML I receive this message... (thi
mislead me to double-post some days ago).
Could someone please unsubscribe the blocked address?
But I guess that's not possible, as anyone else shuold have noticed
this,
On 29 May 2003, Andrew Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The getpassphrase() call is identical to getpass() except it returns 256
chars maximum. Of course you would have to mess with autoconf but I
don't think that should be too hard. Based on the autoconf stuff in the
latest rsync release,
On 20 May 2003, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there anyway you can stop sending these e-mails to everybody on the list?
I've received maybe 3 or 4 of them since yesterday.
One possible solution to reduce the spam/virus traffic on the list would
be to close the list so that
On 14 Jun 2003, Gregory Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am a big fan of rsync, but the more I use it, the more I
become frustrated at rsync's asymetrical functionality.
For instance, I can do this:
rsync /A/ /B/ desthost:/AB
but not this:
rsync srchost:/A/ srchost:/B/ /AB
rsync
On 10 Feb 2003, Cockram, Michael L (ISI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Newbie here!
I am not sure if this is possible or not, but is it possible to multistream
the connections that rsync is making? Say I had a directory with a bunch of
huge sized files. Is there a way of telling rsync to make
Date: Tue Jun 17 04:46:32 2003
Author: mbp
Update of /data/cvs/rsync
In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv10975
Modified Files:
authenticate.c
Log Message:
Add a comment about using getpassphrase() or readpassphrase() rather
than getpass(). No code change.
Revisions:
On 12 Jun 2003, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mind you, that means making the server lightweight with the
client doing all the logic and a nearly stateless connection.
Much like my earlier post on this thread posited.
I was wondering today if that would make it easier to gain confidence
On 12 Jun 2003, Brad Hards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 11:25 am, Martin Pool wrote:
That could be a pretty nice thing. We use little rsync shares on
workstations here for sharing files, and I know some people do the
same with FTP.
What aside from SLP
On 12 Jun 2003, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leave the communications protocol to the communications
layer. You don't save anything by coding reordering and
retransmission at the packet level; that is infrastructure.
Connectionless is fine. Lightweight sessions is better. If
you
On 11 Jun 2003, Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2003-06-11 at 13:59, Martin Pool wrote:
On 11 Jun 2003, Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The vcdiff standard is available as RFC3284, and Josh is listed as one
of the authors.
Yes, I've just been reading
On 10 Jun 2003, Brad Hards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yep. Also, I was playing with the idea of rsync with Service Location Protocol
to use as a replacement for the crappy practice of sharing data over floppy
disks. The rough concept was that each machine had a shared directory, which
you
On 11 Jun 2003, Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The vcdiff standard is available as RFC3284, and Josh is listed as one
of the authors.
Yes, I've just been reading that.
I seem to remember that it was around as an Internet-Draft when I
started, but it didn't seem clear that it would
On 9 Jun 2003, Brad Hards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 15:43 pm, Donovan Baarda wrote:
The comments about rsync never using libhsync/librsync are still true
for the foreseeable future. There are many things rsync includes that
are still missing from librsync,
On 8 Jun 2003, Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The next big thing in delta calculation is probably going to be the
vcdiff encoding format, which should allow a common delta format for
various applications and supports self-referencing delta's, which
makes it capable of compression.
--
Martin
---BeginMessage---
This is a patch to control unix permissions when uploading to a rsyncd-server
by setting rsyncd.conf options.
cu, Stefan
--
Stefan Nehlsen | ParlaNet Administration | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +49 431 988-1260
rsyncd.conf options to handle file permissions
(stolen from
- Forwarded message from Klaus Dittrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Klaus Dittrich)
Subject: files of length zero
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:08:47 +0100
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.00, version=0.10.2
Hi
On 4 Feb 2003, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason why in-place updating is difficult is that
rsync expects the unchanged blocks in the old file may be
relocated. Data inserted into or removed from the file does
not require the rest of the file to be retransmitted.
Unchanged
On 30 Jan 2003, Green, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tend to be someone who automatically looks for trends, and the nice thing
about having just one list is that it lets me know where people are having
problems. Judging by the number of questions we get, one of the biggest
challenges for
On 30 Jan 2003, David Garamond [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
has someone come up with a trick to let disconnected ssh connections be
recovered without terminating and having to restart rsync (perhaps by
wrapping ssh or something)?
Ooh, interesting idea...
You might do it with some kind of wrapper
On 30 Jan 2003, Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 07:40, Green, Paul wrote:
jw schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
[general discussion of forthcoming patches removed]
All well and good. But the question before this thread is
are the changes big
On 29 Jan 2003, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is just a trivial documentation change. The word
link is overloaded. It refers to symlinks, hardlinks and
network links. When looking for references to file links in
the manpages the network references get in the way.
+1
--
Martin
On 28 Jan 2003, Green, Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think splitting the branches will also let us be a little more
experimental in the development branch, at least until we get near
the next release phase, because we'll always have the field release
in which to make crucial bug fixes
Because of the enormous amount of traffic being generated by Windows
viruses[0] I have turned on Mailman attachment filtering on the
high-traffic samba.org lists.
Lists will now pass only text/plain MIME parts through to the list.
multipart/alternative messages with both text and html forms will
[replied to list]
There was a discussion about this on the Samba list a while ago
http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/2002-November/040931.html
Briefly
We should create a team signing key, with an lifetime of about a
year. It has to be relatively short to allow for turnover
On 9 Dec 2002, John E. Malmberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will agree that the SAMBA lists are being kept more spam free than
some of the other mail servers that I get e-mail on.
Just as an interesting data point: our bogofilter setup caught 60 spam
messages in the last 24 hours aimed at
On 10 Dec 2002, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First let me say that Martin (and any others list managers)
is doing pretty well. Although there was a breif rise in
the volumen of spam leaking through during the transition
it has settled down quite nicely. This is an arms war and
I
On 9 Dec 2002, John E. Malmberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it was on any of the reputable blocking lists, I would not be able to
receive any of the SAMBA lists, and you would be getting the
bounces.
It has since been removed from some of them.
I.P. based blocking has shown to be the only
On 8 Dec 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Howdy...
Can we get RID of this member? This is the 2nd time I have seen this
posted. Now after the first time, I figured it would have been put into a
SPAM filter, and thereby the member would not be able to post SPAM to the
list again, but that
On 9 Dec 2002, R P Herrold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Really a better FAQ editor process seems more useful. Isn't
this the purpose of a CVS and commit privileges -- set up one
or more trusted editors with rights, and delegate that aspect.
Anybody who wants to maintain the FAQ-O-Matic
- Forwarded message from David Jonsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
From: David Jonsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bugs in rsync
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 18:38:59 +0200 (CEST)
To: Martin Pool [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrew Tridgell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
First, Thansk for a great tool!
I run rsync supplied
# 0.40 0.40 156.153.255.237
# 0.40 0.307692 delivered-to
# 0.40 0.228571 for
# 0.40 0.164948 from
# 0.40 0.116364 lists.samba.org
# 0.40 0.080706 mbp
# 0.40 0.055292 nov
# 0.40 0.037553 palrel12.hp.com
# 0.40 0.025353 postfix
#
On 5 Nov 2002, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This might be a good time for tagging 2.5.6 perhaps. A fair
number of bugfixes have gone in, popt updates, and a few new
features. It has been stable for about 2 months. Unless
there is something in the pipeline it sounds like time to
On 4 Aug 2002, Wayne Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your previous proposal sounded quite a bit more fine-grained than what
rZync is doing. For instance, it sounded like you would have much more
primitive building-block messages and move much of the controlling
smarts into something like
I think there was some confusion earlier in the thread about the
redo thing in rsync 2. It's not for handling files that have
changed during the transfer. My understanding of this is that it is
used when the whole-file md4 hash shows that the block checksum
actually made a mistake in
On 31 Jul 2002, Dave Dykstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes I think a new release is needed soon, but there's more patches than
that that should get in.
We need to weigh up getting functions in vs making steps small enough
that the chance of breakage is acceptable.
I am afraid that at the
I've been thinking a bit more about Wayne and jw's ideas.
My first draft was proposing what you might call a fine-grained rpc
system, with operations like list this directory, delete this
file, calculate the checksum of this file. I think Wayne's rzync
system was kind of like that too.
One
On 1 Aug 2002, Dave Dykstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another change that I think really ought to go in is something like
the one at
http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/rsync/2002-February/006371.html
to get the correct error codes out of rsync. But first I think we
really need to hear
On 30 Jul 2002, Wayne Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Martin Pool wrote:
The --password-file option only applies to rsync daemon connections,
not ssh.
Perhaps we should make rsync complain about such options that don't make
sense (another example being trying to use
On 29 Jul 2002, Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is because most of python's os.xxx methods de-reference symlinks. You
get this error because 'nothere' doesn't exist. The correct way to get time
info on symlinks is to use os.lstat(), which doesn't de-reference links.
I realize you
On 30 Jul 2002, Jochen K?chelin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can I use the --password-file switch with rsync in order not to
be promted for the users password so I can run rsync in a cronjob?
rsync -uavrpog -e ssh /www [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/DESTINATION/`date +%A`
On 27 Jul 2002, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The server has no need to deal with cleint limitations. I
am saying that the protocol would make the bare minimum of
limitatons (null termination, no nulls in names).
It probably also makes sense to follow NFS4 in representing
paths as a
On 27 Jul 2002, John E. Malmberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A program serving source files for distribution does not need to be that
concerned with preserving exact file attributes, but may need to track
suggested file attributes for for the various client platforms.
A program that is
I'm inclined to agree with jw that truthfully representing time and
leap seconds is a problem for the operating system, not for us. We
just need to be able to accurately represent whatever it tells us,
without thinking very much about the meaning.
Somebody previously pointed out that timestamp
On 22 Jul 2002, Biju Perumal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Martin.
I need to port it to QNX
Any idea of available implementations of rsync on QNX?
I don't know if anybody has done it, but as far as I know QNX is
pretty similar to Unix so it should not be too hard. Why not try try
On 21 Jul 2002, jw schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.From what i can see rsync is very clever. The biggest
problems i see with its inability to scale for large trees,
a little bit of accumulated cruft and featuritis, and
excessively tight integration.
Yes, I think that's basically the
People have proposed network-endianness, ascii fields, etc.
Here's a straw-man proposal on handling this for people to criticize,
ignite, feed to horses, etc. I don't have any specific numbers to
back it up, so take it with a grain of salt. Experiments would be
pretty straightforward.
On 22 Jul 2002, John E. Malmberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Qualities
1. Be reasonably portable: at least in principle, it should be
possible to port to Windows, OS X, and various Unixes without major
changes.
In general, I would like to see OpenVMS in that list.
Yes, OpenVMS, perhaps
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; OpenVMS COMPAQ_AlphaServer_DS10_466_MHz; en-US;
rv:1.1a) Gecko/20020614
If something as complex as Mozilla can run on OpenVMS then I guess we
really have no excuse :-)
--
Martin
--
To unsubscribe or change options:
One more link, about variable-length vs fixed-length encodings:
http://ntrg.cs.tcd.ie/undergrad/4ba2/presentation/xdrandber.html
(The HTML is a bit broken, view the source.)
Basically they make the somewhat obvious point that variable-length
encodings are much slower to handle than
On 18 Jul 2002, Paul Nendick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm working on a commercial project that would benefit immensely from
the use of rsync. However, I cannot convince management that rsync is a
worthy tool due to the rote it's shareware, it's not supported FUD.
Are there any
On 16 Jul 2002, Dan Stromberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If by sillyrename, you mean busy text files are renamed to .nfs*,
sillyrename is in fact the technical term for this. I am not making
it up. I'm pretty sure Callaghan's book calls it that, Sun people call
it that, and it is the term
On 18 Jul 2002, Wayne Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(definitely NOT rzync).
Great. (Excuse my overreaction :-)
Re: rzync's variable-length fields: Note that my code allows more
variation than just 2 or 4 bytes -- e.g., I size the 8-byte file-size
value to only as many bytes as needed
On 11 Jul 2002, Dan Stromberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't get what you are doing. Where did these insecure
suid root files come from in the first place?
Have you ever read bugtraq on a regular basis? They're coming out of
the woodwork.
Another question would be, why do you want
On 12 Jul 2002, Dan Stromberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because when we update, for example, bash, everbody's bash is going to
die on them if we don't keep around backups (segfault as you demand page
from a binary that has Mostly the Same Stuff in Different Places).
rsync creates a new file,
I've put a cleaned-up version of my design notes up here
http://samba.org/~mbp/superlifter/design-notes.html
It's very early days, but (gentle :-) feedback would be welcome. It
has some comments on Wayne's rzync design, which on the whole looks
pretty clever.
I don't have any worthwhile
On 8 Jul 2002, Dave Dykstra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The idea of the rsync client executing programs has been descussed before
and rejected because it could easily be done by an external program if
rsync simply passes it filenames. The only case I can see for having rsync
execute programs
Any thoughts on whether this should go in? I can see arguments either
way. It seems like we ought to think about whether it would be better
to do it as part of a generalized --chmod or --chmod-backup facility.
--
Martin
On 21 Jun 2002, Dan Stromberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Included below
On 22 Jun 2002, macgiver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi
i love rsync, but i want to know how it is possible to let rsync
download a file with the same filename, and not a temp filename like:
package.tar.gz.hzmkjz5 or so...
i don 't want to use temp filenames when downloading with rsync.
On 12 Jun 2002, Tom Worley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Martin,
Sorry to mail you directly, but I've had no joy trying to get round this
problem (read the faqs, posted on the mailing list RTFM a lot etc)
This is (slightly updated) what I posted to the mailing list:
I'm stuck on a problem
1 - 100 of 413 matches
Mail list logo
