Re: any news about rsync and acl's?
Maybe rsync isn't ready to do it yet, but you could cheat. Have the server side prepare a list of ACLs, from which they can be reconstructed on the reciever. I'm sure there's a more efficient way to do it, maybe with the Solaris-ACL perl package, or coding it in C, but here's a quick and dirty way to do it with shell scripting. createacllist: #!/bin/sh find $* -print |while read object do acl=`getfacl $object | sed 's/#.*//` acl=`echo $acl |tr -d ' '` acl=`echo $acl |tr ' ' ,` echo "$object $acl" done applyacllist: #!/bin/sh cat $1 |while read file acl do setfacl -s $acl $file done (See attached file: aclrep.tar) Have the server run createacllist from time to time. Have the client grab the acl list, and run applyacllist on it after the sync. Maybe you could save processor time by keeping the old acl list's checksum, and if it hasn't changed, don't run it. Tim Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] 303.682.4917 Philips Semiconductor - Colorado TC 1880 Industrial Circle Suite D Longmont, CO 80501 "There are some who call me Tim?" Martin Pool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@lists.samba.org on 07/12/2001 05:52:13 PM Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Obergehrer, Walter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (bcc: Tim Conway/LMT/SC/PHILIPS) Subject: Re: any news about rsync and acl's? Classification: On 12 Jul 2001, "Obergehrer, Walter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anybody know if rsync can be used in a way to preserve the ACL's? > If not, are there plans to implement it in the near future? > If not, are there other tools which can handle ACL's when > synchronizing? I don't know if there are any plans to support them at the moment. They are most definitely on the list for rsync 3.0, but there is no target date for that yet. We would like them to map correctly between heterogenous systems, which is not trivial. http://rsync.samba.org/cgi-bin/rsync.fom?file=48 -- Martin VA Linux Systems aclrep.tar
Re: any news about rsync and acl's?
Martin Pool wrote: > On 12 Jul 2001, "Obergehrer, Walter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Does anybody know if rsync can be used in a way to preserve the ACL's? > > If not, are there plans to implement it in the near future? > > If not, are there other tools which can handle ACL's when > > synchronizing? > > I don't know if there are any plans to support them at the moment. > They are most definitely on the list for rsync 3.0, but there is no > target date for that yet. We would like them to map correctly between > heterogenous systems, which is not trivial. > > http://rsync.samba.org/cgi-bin/rsync.fom?file=48 As an example for others, consider the problem of syncronizing a tree of files from a Solaris machine to a Linux machine running a filesystem with no ACLs. Then syncronize it back. Now consider the question "if the ACLs came back, where were they on the Linux machine? and what form were they in?". ACLs may not be implemented at all on intermediate machines. Then it would be necessary to store them as file data somewhere. But then, what if someone had real files that looked like the way rsync decided to store a foreign system's ACLs, and they wanted to send all those files over to that ACL-capable system as is (e.g. no ACLs). This is an inherint ambiguity that requires some careful planning and thought, and most likely will require decisions on the part of the user as well. For example, the user (administrator of the systems involved) may have to decide between trying to map ACLs to the target system (with risk of loss due to differences in the way they are implemented) or store them in some "out of band" data area ... and subsquently specify where that is for both the purpose of the files coming in and going back out. Standards in ACLs would help, but there remains the issue of lack of implementation as well. The first step rsync could accomplish would be retaining ACLs on homogeneous systems. But this still requires mapping the ACL implementations to the rsync protocol. Should each system type be mapped to a different representation of data in the protocol, or should there be one broad scope of ACL representation in the protocol that different ACLs get mapped to. Decisions, decisions. A lot of exploration is needed before this gets cut into stone. ACLs that are extra files are trivial to do between like machines. ACLs that are metadata are not trivial even on like machines. It gets to be a mess out there when implementations preceed standards. -- - | Phil Howard - KA9WGN | Dallas | http://linuxhomepage.com/ | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Texas, USA | http://phil.ipal.org/ | -
Re: rsync+ patch
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Martin Pool writes: > I'm inclined to apply this: at the very least, it doesn't look like it > could damage anything else. Any other opinions? Yes please! I would personally love to see that functionality supported in the stock rsync distributions. Since the patch implements a feature that is periodically requested by users, it seems to me there is a good reason for inclusion. -- Alberto Alberto Accomazzi mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] NASA Astrophysics Data System http://adsabs.harvard.edu Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysicshttp://cfawww.harvard.edu 60 Garden Street, MS 83, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
new to rsync for WIN: failed to connect - descriptor is a file not a socket
I've tried to use rsync to build the debian CD Images from their pseudo-image kit. Yet, everytime I run it, I get the error message: failed to connect to ftp.fi.debian.org - descriptor is a file not a socket. I am running Windows 98 (which I want to get rid of, and run linux instead) and I do have direct access to the internet. The commandline I use looks like this: rsync --verbose --progress --stats --block-size=8192 ftp.fi.debian.org::debian-cd/2.2_rev3/i386/binary-i386-1_NONUS.iso . I also tried to get only the directory listings of the rsync server, I left out options, I tried different versions of rsync, whatever I did, I kept getting the same error message. Probably there is a real easy solution for this, it's just not easy enough for me. I'm really looking forward to your replies. Thanks a lot in advance! F.J.
Re: Two issues (rsync 2.4.6)
Paul D. Smith wrote: > I have an anon rsync (2.4.6) daemon set up in my inetd on a Solaris 2.6 > server. > > I'm seeing two strange things, and I wonder if anyone has any comments. > I tried using Google and other searches for these but didn't come up > with anything very useful (a list of error messages rsync generates > along with their meanings would be great bonus!) > > 1) At the beginning of my transfers (on the client side), I see this > message: > > IO error encountered - skipping file deletion > > Does that mean it's not deleting any files? Why? I suspect that it got an I/O error in a situation (like reading a directory) that creates a non-zero probability that the list of files that should not be deleted is incomplete. The deletion is skipped in order to avoid the risk of deleting something that should not be deleted. I would guess it's not deleting any files because it cannot be sure that it would be deleting only the ones really to be deleted. The thing to do is find out why there is an I/O error, or what it thinks is an I/O error. It may, for example, be getting an incomplete list from the server. > 2) At the end of a transfer that seems otherwise successful, in the > server log I invariably see this message: > > transfer interrupted (code 11) at main.c(295) > > As far as I can tell it happens _every_ time a transfer is > completed. Also as far as I can tell, the transfer appears to > work... but this seems like something that might be serious. Is this via RSH/SSH or the rsyncd port? This could be related to #1. -- - | Phil Howard - KA9WGN | Dallas | http://linuxhomepage.com/ | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Texas, USA | http://phil.ipal.org/ | -
