Re: do I always have to use either --checksum or --times ?

--checksum is only slower than re-copying if your network connection between the hosts is similar in speed (or faster than) each host's local disk access. If local disk access is 10x your network link, it is definitely not slower than re-copying. Having said that, it really is *very* slow, and

[Bug 15122] New: Potential vulnerability: rsync creates files outside the target directory

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15122 Bug ID: 15122 Summary: Potential vulnerability: rsync creates files outside the target directory Product: rsync Version: 3.2.0 Hardware: All OS: Linux

Re: do I always have to use either --checksum or --times ?

You should almost never use --checksum. It is slower than just re-copying everything. You should almost always use --times (or --archive which includes --times). Without this rsync is almost as dumb as cp. Also, ssh has been the default --ssh for a long time. On 7/14/22 04:22, Fourhundred

do I always have to use either --checksum or --times ?

Hello, I want to sync local folder to remote server. When I run follwing command repeatedly, it always transfers everything each time again and again: rsync --rsh='ssh' foo/ server:/foo/ does it mean I have to always use either --checksum or --times, to prevent repeated transfer of files

Re: Does rsync verify its writes?

Note that it won't actually tell you that the file was written wrongly just that it is different. In fact, you can only even know that it might be detecting a broken file with --itemize-changes and look for files with a checksum difference but not a timestamp difference. Though there are

Re: Does rsync verify its writes?

On Tue 12 Jul 2022, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: > Rsync does not verify writes. --checksum doesn't verify anything. Sounds > like you want a file verification tool. The simplest would be md5sum. Running rsync --checksum directly after transferring your files will verify that the files are

Re: Does rsync verify its writes?

Rsync does not verify writes. --checksum doesn't verify anything. Sounds like you want a file verification tool. The simplest would be md5sum. On 7/12/22 02:31, Mark Filipak via rsync wrote: Hello. Does rsync verify its writes? Re, 'info rsync'. Maybe I just being stupid, but there's no

Does rsync verify its writes?

Hello. Does rsync verify its writes? Re, 'info rsync'. Maybe I just being stupid, but there's no mention of verification in the 'DESCRIPTION' section, so despite the words in the 'OPTIONS' section, '-c, --checksum' topic (which I may be misinterpreting), I assume rsync does not verify except

Re: Rsync Users and Groups

On Fri 24 Jun 2022, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: > Nope. Rsync groups are not groups of users they are just @users with their > own password. I believe the @ just designates that you intend multiple > people to have that password and use that username. I think I have to disagree here. The

Re: Customizing compression per file?

It actually does that by default. Though you might need to add to the list of file types with --skip-compress. On 6/24/22 19:35, Joseph Garvin via rsync wrote: I have an rsync cron job to backup folders that contain many different types of files. Most of these are uncompressed files, so the

Customizing compression per file?

I have an rsync cron job to backup folders that contain many different types of files. Most of these are uncompressed files, so the -z option would speed up their transfer. However there are a few files that are already compressed where -z will just needlessly burn CPU and slow down the transfer.

Re: Rsync Users and Groups

Nope. Rsync groups are not groups of users they are just @users with their own password. I believe the @ just designates that you intend multiple people to have that password and use that username. On 6/24/22 12:34, Alexander Gribanov via rsync wrote: Hello, Kevin! Thank You very much for

Re: Rsync Users and Groups

Hello, Kevin! Thank You very much for the reply. пт, 24 июн. 2022 г. в 19:00, Kevin Korb via rsync : > I think you are thinking too much of rsync here. Rsync groups are the > same as users they just have an @ in front of the name. If you want > UNIX style users and groups then use rsync over

Re: Rsync Users and Groups

I think you are thinking too much of rsync here. Rsync groups are the same as users they just have an @ in front of the name. If you want UNIX style users and groups then use rsync over ssh and get the bonus of ssh's authentication as well as not needing an rsyncd.conf file at all. On

Rsync Users and Groups

Hello everybody! I'm trying to configure rsync-server, but still I can't figure out how to manage users and groups. I read in the documentation that I could use both, but there is nothing about how to add a user into a particular group... Why am I doing this? 1. I have about 10 modules, which

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via d1e42ffa A few minor fixes. via 36f489c2 Link to rsyncd.conf page server-setup details. from defe2287 Improve the filter intro. https://git.samba.org/?p=rsync.git;a=shortlog;h=master - Log

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via defe2287 Improve the filter intro. via 112bef11 Improve filter discussion. via b38780f3 Some proxy improvements (mainly). via 5f33238f Some clarifications about transfer rules. via 3592ac3c Include bsd/strings.h if it

Re: [rsync-announce] Rsync 3.2.4 released

For those packaging rsync 3.2.4 using a C compiler where "char" defaults to "unsigned char", such as ARM systems, rsync 3.2.4 will potentially generate the wrong rolling checksum values, thus failing to optimize the copy with the full amount of matching local data from a prior copy when high-bit

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via 4f741add Fix configure's "signed char" check via 355b81d8 Avoid -pedantic-errors on non-x86 for the moment. from 6f355533 Fix grabbing version value in configure. https://git.samba.org/?p=rsync.git;a=shortlog;h=master - Log

Re: Rsync 3.2.4 released

For those packaging rsync 3.2.4 using a C compiler where "char" defaults to "unsigned char", such as ARM systems, rsync 3.2.4 will potentially generate the wrong rolling checksum values, thus failing to optimize the copy with the full amount of matching local data from a prior copy when high-bit

Re: Merging three slightly different directories

Robin Wrote: > So I'm not quite following your Windows rsync problem. Specifically, do you mean: >"I copied files A, B, and C, and there's still 3 files but each file is bigger" > or > "I copied files A, B, and C to a directory containing files that I > thought were identical

compiling static binaries

For anybody trying to build a static binary: Thanks to Han Boetes for the post here, advising to use musl. Thanks to Florian Dejonckheere for posting this script: https://github.com/JBBgameich/rsync-static Here is my small contrib on this, for the lazy folks. I download the musl prebuild

Re: Merging three slightly different directories

So I'm not quite following your Windows rsync problem. Specifically, do you mean: "I copied files A, B, and C, and there's still 3 files but each file is bigger" or "I copied files A, B, and C to a directory containing files that I thought were identical using the -b flag but now there's twice

Re: Merging three slightly different directories

On Thu, 09 Jun 2022 02:20:02 -0400 Robin Lee Powell wrote > It would help if you gave us an example of what you'd *want* to have > happen in different situations, but what about the -b option? This > will do nothing with identical files but keep

Re: Merging three slightly different directories

It would help if you gave us an example of what you'd *want* to have happen in different situations, but what about the -b option? This will do nothing with identical files but keep both versions of non-identical ones. On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 12:24:16AM +, hput via rsync wrote: > I want to

Re: Merging three slightly different directories

I suspect you want a duplicate finder more than a file transfer tool. EG: https://stromberg.dnsalias.org/~strombrg/equivalence-classes.html On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 5:36 PM hput via rsync wrote: > I want to merge 3 slightly different directories of mostly images. > > Not just mostly but the

Merging three slightly different directories

I want to merge 3 slightly different directories of mostly images. Not just mostly but the vast majority are images files. Each directory has about 285 GB of files. At first I thought I would just run a straightish rsync from each directory inturn starting with the biggest which is not much

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via 6f355533 Fix grabbing version value in configure. via 71090b7e Improve discussion of old-args in advanced usage. from 2ab2ee16 Make md-convert --test work again. https://git.samba.org/?p=rsync.git;a=shortlog;h=master - Log

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via 2ab2ee16 Make md-convert --test work again. from 1e858e39 Manpage improvements. https://git.samba.org/?p=rsync.git;a=shortlog;h=master - Log - commit

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via 1e858e39 Manpage improvements. via 664639e3 Use the maintainer's timezone for translating the manpage date. via 517b9d91 Setup for 3.2.5dev. from 0ac7ebce Preparing for release of 3.2.4

Re: Problem with file exclusion pattern

On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 7:35 AM H wrote: > However, would I not still need --include='*/' since I want it to > recourse into all subdirectories? > Only if you could have a directory that matches the lock name and you didn't want to exclude it. The default is to include a file/dir unless

Re: Problem with file exclusion pattern

On May 3, 2022 2:16:58 AM EDT, Wayne Davison wrote: >On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 3:33 PM H wrote: > >> rsync -vHrltDium -c --chmod=Du+rwx,go-rwx,Fu+rw,go-rw --no-perms >--stats >> --include='*' --include='*/' --exclude='*.~lock*' --exclude='*' -e >"ssh -y >> -p 22" ~/test/ someone@1.2.3.4:~/test >> >

Re: Problem with file exclusion pattern

On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 3:33 PM H wrote: > rsync -vHrltDium -c --chmod=Du+rwx,go-rwx,Fu+rw,go-rw --no-perms --stats > --include='*' --include='*/' --exclude='*.~lock*' --exclude='*' -e "ssh -y > -p 22" ~/test/ someone@1.2.3.4:~/test > See the latest manpage's filter-rules section

Re: Fwd: Problem with file exclusion pattern

On 04/30/2022 09:13 PM, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: > Sure, that is the way it normally works.  By default everything is included.  > Excludes exclude things.  Includes are exceptions to includes that follow. > > Note that this can get very complicated.  --exclude-from=file.txt makes > things

Re: Fwd: Problem with file exclusion pattern

Sure, that is the way it normally works. By default everything is included. Excludes exclude things. Includes are exceptions to includes that follow. Note that this can get very complicated. --exclude-from=file.txt makes things much easier as you can use the +/- syntax to put both

Re: Fwd: Problem with file exclusion pattern

On 04/30/2022 08:22 PM, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: > Includes override excludes that follow.  So, your include of * meant that > nothing was being excluded.  An exclude before any includes isn't affected by > the includes. > > On 4/30/22 20:04, H via rsync wrote: >> On 04/30/2022 07:56 PM, H

Re: Fwd: Problem with file exclusion pattern

Includes override excludes that follow. So, your include of * meant that nothing was being excluded. An exclude before any includes isn't affected by the includes. On 4/30/22 20:04, H via rsync wrote: On 04/30/2022 07:56 PM, H via rsync wrote: Ah, I was under the impression that all

Re: Fwd: Problem with file exclusion pattern

On 04/30/2022 07:56 PM, H via rsync wrote: > > Ah, I was under the impression that all inclusion patterns need to preceed > the exclusion patterns? > > > > Forwarded Message > Subject: Re: Problem with file exclusion pattern > Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 18:49:22 -0400 >

Fwd: Problem with file exclusion pattern

Ah, I was under the impression that all inclusion patterns need to preceed the exclusion patterns? Forwarded Message Subject:Re: Problem with file exclusion pattern Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 18:49:22 -0400 From: Kevin Korb To: H Drop the include of * or move

Problem with file exclusion pattern

I am running rsync on Linux and have yet to find the appropriate pattern to exclude files containing '.~lock' as part of the name of files existing in any directory, ie ~/test and below. rsync -vHrltDium -c --chmod=Du+rwx,go-rwx,Fu+rw,go-rw --no-perms --stats --include='*' --include='*/'

Rsync 3.2.4 released

I have released rsync 3.2.4. Another typical release with both bug fixes and some enhancements. It also contains a security fix for the bundled zlib 1.2.8, which may or may not be used in your particular build configuration. To see a summary of all the recent changes, visit this link:

[SCM] The rsync repository. - annotated tag v3.2.4 created

The annotated tag, v3.2.4 has been created at db2a0aed76cfedeb87179017167c29cc2ab7a1e8 (tag) tagging 0ac7ebceef70417355f25daf9e2fd94e84c49749 (commit) replaces v3.2.4pre4 tagged by Wayne Davison on Fri Apr 15 13:35:46 2022 -0700 - Log

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via 0ac7ebce Preparing for release of 3.2.4 from 85c56b26 The latest news. https://git.samba.org/?p=rsync.git;a=shortlog;h=master - Log - commit

[SCM] The rsync repository. - annotated tag v3.2.4pre4 created

The annotated tag, v3.2.4pre4 has been created at 5f6f11d2bb4da2ea787d9a428613e01b04bb6033 (tag) tagging d821e4cbfbc66848cdf91a336af26fdb89dd9a8f (commit) replaces v3.2.4pre3 tagged by Wayne Davison on Sun Mar 27 15:00:06 2022 -0700 - Log

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via 85c56b26 The latest news. via 10aeb75c Add debugging comment about read_buf_(). via d41bb98c systemd: restart daemon on-failure (#302) via 2fda5169 Specify log format to avoid malfunctions and unexpected errors. (#305)

[Bug 13463] Please consider using the IP_FREEBIND socket option

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13463 --- Comment #5 from Simon Deziel --- The `Restart=on-failure` option was added in https://github.com/WayneD/rsync/commit/d41bb98c09bf0b999c4eee4e2125c7e5d0747ec4 This should paper over the problem of late showing IPv6 addresses due to DAD taking

[Bug 13463] Please consider using the IP_FREEBIND socket option

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13463 --- Comment #4 from Simon Deziel --- Since rsyncd exits with error code 10 ("Error in socket I/O") there are two possible ways to improve the systemd unit: [Service] ... RestartForceExitStatus=10 Or: [Service] ... Restart=on-failure Both

[Bug 13463] Please consider using the IP_FREEBIND socket option

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13463 --- Comment #3 from Andreas Hasenack --- Thanks for all the opinions. I have one remaining issue, and that is with "systemctl start rsync.service" not detecting the failure right away. The systemd unit file calls rsync like this: [Service]

[rsync-announce] Rsync 3.2.4pre4 released

Rsync version 3.2.4pre4 is now available for release testing. This is planned to be the final pre-release before 3.2.4. It contains some configuration improvements for the optimization features, some bug fixes, and the addition of --copy-devices. To see a summary of the release changes, visit

Rsync 3.2.4pre4 released

Rsync version 3.2.4pre4 is now available for release testing. This is planned to be the final pre-release before 3.2.4. It contains some configuration improvements for the optimization features, some bug fixes, and the addition of --copy-devices. To see a summary of the release changes, visit

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via d821e4cb Preparing for release of 3.2.4pre4 via 8aa46511 Add new & improved `--copy-devices` option. via 8977815f Some `--write-device` fixes. via a48c20c9 Combine some alt-dest tests. via 601f4743 Rename compare-dest

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers, docker approach

On Sat, 12 Mar 2022 at 08:45, Florian Sager via rsync wrote: > Hi, > > I gave up using rrsync some years ago because of > a) potential security issues with path references that can occur within > the rsync execution in the call of rrsync > b) possibly unmatched rsync options (rrsync must be kept

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via 13c4019e Also ignore a root-level rrsync file. via b7b387b1 Add FALLTHROUGH comment. via 7569edfa Use ac_includes_default in largefile support test. via 55b2a068 Test newer FreeBSD. via b81a5095 Make asm use more

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

On 3/11/2022 4:39 AM, Dr. Mark Asbach via rsync wrote: a) Using ssh-askpass, we can use the options -e "ssh -X" --rsync-path="sudo -A rsync" (see https://askubuntu.com/a/1167758). The problem in our scenario is that using ansible, we run the identical rsync command on multiple hosts in

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 10:36:49PM -0800, Bri Hatch via rsync wrote: > On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 10:22 PM Kevin Korb via rsync > wrote: > > > Rsync includes a script named rrsync that handles this perfectly. > > And authprogs provides similar functionality, though you use yaml to define > what

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

On 12/03/22 19:36, Bri Hatch via rsync wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 10:22 PM Kevin Korb via rsync mailto:rsync@lists.samba.org>> wrote: Rsync includes a script named rrsync that handles this perfectly. And authprogs provides similar functionality, though you use yaml to define what

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

Hi there, Thanks for your feedback! > Bear in mind, putting a password in an environment variable can be seen by > other users on the same system with "ps auxwwe". Sure. But in my scenario, the control host is considered a „safe“ developer machine, while the target host is considered the

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

The environment variables of a process when it was started are available via /proc//environ file. So while other users on that system can't see the environ, every other process running as your target user could. Worse, however, your "echo" process puts the password in arguments, and any local

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 12:23 PM Dr. Mark Asbach via rsync < rsync@lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hi there, hi past me, > > > My (non-working) attempt: > > […] > > So it seems the "-l" is dropped into the void letting ssh assume USER > was the target host? I don’t actually get what I can do. > > Turns

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

Hi there, hi past me, > My (non-working) attempt: > […] > So it seems the "-l" is dropped into the void letting ssh assume USER was the > target host? I don’t actually get what I can do. Turns out, I have to write down the description of my issue and then send the email before I magically

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

Hi everyone, Thanks for all the ideas! Meanwhile, I’ve made some progress because there was another answer on "ask ubuntu" that got absolutely no interaction but that is a brilliant solution: https://askubuntu.com/a/1263657 : > just create a wrapper script for the ssh command. > ssh_sudo: > {

Re: Restriction enforcement

On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 7:15 AM Hove, K.W. van (Koen, Student M-CS) via rsync wrote: > I noticed that --max-size, --min-size, --exclude, and --include are only > sent by the client as a "request" to the server, and that if the server for > some reason chooses to ignore those options and include

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers, docker approach

Hi, I gave up using rrsync some years ago because of a) potential security issues with path references that can occur within the rsync execution in the call of rrsync b) possibly unmatched rsync options (rrsync must be kept up-to-date to match new options _and_ some options need to be

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

Also, it appears that it requires the allowed directory to be specified in authorized_keys. Mine uses an external list of allowed directories, so I don't need lots of lines (and separate keys?) in authorized_keys in order to deal with the several directories I back up per host. Cheers,

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

It may do the job; it doesn't AFAIK explain why the options are undocumented :-) Cheers, Richard On 12/03/22 19:22, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: Rsync includes a script named rrsync that handles this perfectly. On 3/12/22 01:08, Richard Hector via rsync wrote: On 12/03/22 18:38, Richard

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 10:22 PM Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: > Rsync includes a script named rrsync that handles this perfectly. > And authprogs provides similar functionality, though you use yaml to define what is/isn't allowed. However it does allow you to use one SSH identity for potentially

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

Rsync includes a script named rrsync that handles this perfectly. On 3/12/22 01:08, Richard Hector via rsync wrote: On 12/03/22 18:38, Richard Hector via rsync wrote: And I do my backups (using dirvish) as root, using a key with a forced command. FWIW, that forced command is here:

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

On 12/03/22 18:38, Richard Hector via rsync wrote: And I do my backups (using dirvish) as root, using a key with a forced command. FWIW, that forced command is here: https://github.com/rwhector/dirvish-forced-command It's rather unpolished and undocumented, but comments very welcome :-)

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

On 12/03/22 06:06, Dr. Mark Asbach via rsync wrote: Hi Dan, Why not rsync directly as root? Then you can use a passwordless, passphraseless RSA (or similar) keypair. I'm not saying I agree with this, but ... That’s because these are cloud instances that get maintained by multiple

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 4:57 AM Dr. Mark Asbach via rsync < rsync@lists.samba.org> wrote: > b) Passing the password to sudo via stdin using --rsync-path "echo > MYPASSWORD | sudo -S rsync" (see https://askubuntu.com/a/1155897). In that ask-ubuntu example they are running a client rsync via

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

Hi Dan, > Why not rsync directly as root? Then you can use a passwordless, > passphraseless RSA (or similar) keypair. That’s because these are cloud instances that get maintained by multiple admins. If we require all of them to log in as root, we would have to share the root password – and

Re: Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

Why not rsync directly as root? Then you can use a passwordless, passphraseless RSA (or similar) keypair. On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 4:58 AM Dr. Mark Asbach via rsync < rsync@lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hi there, > > We are using ansible to deploy system configuration and web application > source

Trying to elevate rsync privileges when connecting over ssh without using NOPASSWD in sudoers

Hi there, We are using ansible to deploy system configuration and web application source code to clusters of Linux computers. One part of this process requires transferring large directories to the target hosts, which is done using the „synchronize“ command in ansible that is in turn a wrapper

Restriction enforcement

Dear all, I noticed that --max-size, --min-size, --exclude, and --include are only sent by the client as a "request" to the server, and that if the server for some reason chooses to ignore those options and include those files in the file list anyway, the client will happily run with it. Is

Re: Multiple paths in a module?

Thanks to everyone helped! I initially thought there might be a direct way to make modules support multiple paths, but your replies confirmed that using bind mount is the way to go. And Roland's suggestion that I should use systemd inspired me to look into systemd-mount, which can beautifully

Re: Multiple paths in a module?

Glen Huang via rsync wrote: > ... the mounting paths are dynamically configured in another > service, so I need to remount whenever the paths change > if I mount them beforehand. Could the remount be done in that other service? > With the "early exec" hook, I can avoid such remounting, > but

Re: Multiple paths in a module?

I may be missing your intent, but why not set up different rsyncd modules for the different paths? Or are you saying that the paths change dynamically all the time? In which case set a cron or triggered script to change the symlinks to the paths..? H On Sat, Mar 5, 2022 at 5:08 AM Glen Huang via

Re: Multiple paths in a module?

On Sat, Mar 5, 2022 at 10:34 PM Roland wrote: > > why no writing your own systemd service which does the > mounting and setting proper dependency, so it starts before rsyncd starts ? Thanks for the quick reply. The clients will use rsyncd via ssh, so there is no systemd service in play, and as

Multiple paths in a module?

Hi, I'm trying to set up a module for rsyncd where it offers multiple paths like /var/www, /etc/app, etc to be accessed by clients. However, from rsyncd.conf(5) it seems a module can point to only one path. So it seems I should use something like a bind mount, and mount paths to

[Bug 8682] Skip current transfer keyboard function

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8682 --- Comment #6 from Joachim Wagner --- The "echo > sourcefile" workaround seems to not trigger an error, at least not straight away and at least on XFS, but instead speeds up the operation and stops writing more data to the target file. Observation

[SCM] The rsync repository. - branch master updated

The branch, master has been updated via 26f4dbe1 Change usage (--version) output to note when ASM isn't really being used. via b3f1970f Fix wording in RSYNC_PORT section (#293) via c51da917 Build Cygwin on windows-2022 with newer python. [buildall] via 81f71f6f Add

Re: use absolute paths in transfer list

> On 2022-02-18 03:07, Wayne Davison wrote: On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 2:57 AM Fourhundred Thecat via rsync mailto:rsync@lists.samba.org>> wrote: rsync -a --del --out-format='/%f%L' /path/one/ /path/two/ /dest/path/ that works perfectly. thank you ! -- Please use reply-all for most replies to

Re: use absolute paths in transfer list

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 2:57 AM Fourhundred Thecat via rsync < rsync@lists.samba.org> wrote: > how can I print the full paths? > If you're pushing files (which includes a local copy), putting "%f" into --out-format gets you the full specified path for the source files. It likes to strip the

use absolute paths in transfer list

Hello I have files in /source/A/B/C and I am syncing them to /dest/A/ rsync --info=name1,del2 -r /source/A/ /dest/A/ the transfer list is printed as relative paths: B/C instead of full path: /source/A/B/C how can I print the full paths? -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid

Re: Confused as to why rsync thinks time, owner and group of many files differ

On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 2:23 PM Andy Smith via rsync wrote: > When rsync considers times as being different, it means mtime, right? Yet > these files have identical mtimes. They also have identical uid, gid and > permissions. > They do now, but it looks like you have lots of files hard-linked

Re: exclude include path problems

ichiwawa I have been very much over thinking the problem, time for holiday Thank You, this is fixing the dilemma On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 7:37 PM Paul Slootman via rsync < rsync@lists.samba.org> wrote: > On Mon 07 Feb 2022, Edwardo Garcia via rsync wrote: > > > > Lets call module mirror > > this

Re: exclude include path problems

On Mon 07 Feb 2022, Edwardo Garcia via rsync wrote: > > Lets call module mirror > this results in about 200 or more directories (projects), but I only want > one of them, lets call it foo, the problem is foo/ has about 50 > directories, but the one and only one we want is bar, but bar also has >

exclude include path problems

Halo, for few hours now I have been racking my brain and going even more grey if that is possible. for some time my rsync script works, but now I see it does not, after changes mirror operator made, as a result I need some help. Lets call module mirror this results in about 200 or more

directory atime not preserved by --open-noatime

Hi. (using version v3.2.3 on Linux, this might be Linux specific) I recently noticed that rsync's --open-noatime option does not preserve directory access times (atime) of the source directories (so they get all modified), even though it does preserve atime of files within those directories, the

Re: Confused as to why rsync thinks time, owner and group of many files differ

On Thu 03 Feb 2022, Andy Smith via rsync wrote: > sudo rsync -iPva \ > --inplace \ > --numeric-ids \ > --delete \ > /data/backup/rsnapshot/daily.0/cacti/ \ > root@koff:/data/backup/rsnapshot/daily.0/cacti/ > > ... >5,258 100%5.78kB/s0:00:00 (xfr#1276,

Re: Confused as to why rsync thinks time, owner and group of many files differ

On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 3:50 PM Andy Smith via rsync wrote: > I am tempted to blow away the btrfs filesystem and just do xfs to > xfs, to rule out weird issues there. It would be a shame though as > I was hoping to use btrfs's compression here. > You might be able to do a partial transfer to a

Re: Confused as to why rsync thinks time, owner and group of many files differ

Hi Kevin, On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 05:38:41PM -0500, Kevin Korb via rsync wrote: > Are you using the same source and target each time? Yes. > I ask because the only discrepancy I see is the link count which > shows that there are 11 more instances of that inode on the source > than the target.

Re: Confused as to why rsync thinks time, owner and group of many files differ

Are you using the same source and target each time? I ask because the only discrepancy I see is the link count which shows that there are 11 more instances of that inode on the source than the target. Maybe instances in other snapshots are being updated/re-linked? The only other thing to

Confused as to why rsync thinks time, owner and group of many files differ

Hi, I am at the moment using rsync to move quite a big set of backups from one machine to another. The source filesystem is xfs; the target filesystem is btrfs. For various reasons I have been stopping the rsync part way through and re-starting. I have noticed that a large number of files are

bug#282 : timeout option does not work as expected when remote system is hung

hello, I have opened https://github.com/WayneD/rsync/issues/282 looks similar to https://github.com/WayneD/rsync/issues/164 and https://github.com/WayneD/rsync/issues/8 roland -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options:

[Bug 14962] Crash/restart using rsync 3.2.3 on M1 Mac

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14962 --- Comment #1 from Mike Bombich --- This is probably the same kernel memory leak I documented here: https://bombich.com/kb/ccc6/macos-monterey-known-issues#smb_panics You can confirm whether it's the same issue by looking for

Re: trailing spaces in exclude-from file

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 1:08 AM Jürgen Bausa via rsync < rsync@lists.samba.org> wrote: > However, it didn't work in the beginning and took me some time to find > out, that a space at the end (e.g. "+ /mnt/Windows/Users " in the second > line) will be interpreted and thus, the directory is assumed

[Bug 14962] New: Crash/restart using rsync 3.2.3 on M1 Mac

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14962 Bug ID: 14962 Summary: Crash/restart using rsync 3.2.3 on M1 Mac Product: rsync Version: 3.2.0 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

Re: trailing spaces in exclude-from file

On Mon, Jan 24, 2022, Paul Slootman via rsync wrote: >On Mon 24 Jan 2022, Jürgen Bausa via rsync wrote: >> >> However, that's just a proposal. But the behavior of trailing spaces is >> something I guess should be corrected. > >Is it? >How would you otherwise specify a space that you *do* intend

re: trailing spaces in exclude-from file

On Mon 24 Jan 2022, Paul Slootman via rsync wrote: > >On Mon 24 Jan 2022, Jürgen Bausa via rsync wrote: >> >> However, that's just a proposal. But the behavior of trailing spaces is >> something I guess should be corrected. > >Is it? >How would you otherwise specify a space that you *do* intend

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >