Matt McCutchen wrote:
On Sun, 2007-11-18 at 17:45 -0500, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
Using some of the techniques you show here, it would be possible to trigger the
backup process and push the data from the laptop.
Yes, push backups can be done quite elegantly by pushing the new data to
a
On Sun, 2007-11-18 at 17:45 -0500, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
Using some of the techniques you show here, it would be possible to trigger
the
backup process and push the data from the laptop.
Yes, push backups can be done quite elegantly by pushing the new data to
a directory and triggering
On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 11:29 +0100, Nico -telmich- Schottelius wrote:
I suggest you to use ACLs on Linux, so permissions are always correct.
This won't help because Eric is using rsync 2.6.6, which doesn't
consider default ACLs its explicit calculation of a new destination
file's permissions. (I
Eric S. Johansson [Sun, Nov 18, 2007 at 12:40:31AM -0500]:
[correcting permissions]
I suggest you to use ACLs on Linux, so permissions are always correct.
Especially default ACLs are pretty well supported by Linux, so you can
do things like
setfacl -m d:g:yourgroup:rwx -R .
and to
On Sun, 2007-11-18 at 00:40 -0500, Eric S. Johansson wrote:
I'm looking to see of it is practical to have an rsync server run a script
after
a transfer finishes.
If you mean the server process invoked over remote shell, you could do
something like this:
rsync
Matt McCutchen wrote:
...
thanks for the suggestions. This gives me some options to work with. I really
like the idea of the post-xfer exec option but unfortunately, my installed
rsync is a bit old (2.6.6) and I'm not exactly keen on trashing my environment
with tarball installs because
I'm looking to see of it is practical to have an rsync server run a script after
a transfer finishes. I am moving files (python source) from windows (common
point of development) to a few linux machines. big problem being
owner/group/perms are always wrong and python's module install process
