Re: Shorten long lines in man page options summary

2003-12-29 Thread Chuck Wolber
> One thing that's bugged me is that some of the man page lines in the > options summary are longer than 79 chars and wrap onto the next line. %< SNIP $< SNIP > Comments? Suggestions? I second your point. It's a real pain in the butt to be in a noisy datacenter at 4am with nothing but a conso

Re: Question about file ownership on destination

2003-12-29 Thread Jim Salter
I'm not sure how that could be considered a security issue on rsync's part - if rsync wasn't running as root, how would it be able to set uid and gid arbitrarily? > acct svcs wrote: After your suggestion I did discover a solution, though. I had to explicitly assign uid and gid to root in rsync

Re: Question about file ownership on destination

2003-12-29 Thread acct svcs
Wayne Actually, I tried that earlier and it didn't work. The connection terminates unexpectedly almost immediately after the process begins. Rsyncd uses user nobody by default, and that user can't create the files on the server. That would work perfectly if the server was the source, but in

Shorten long lines in man page options summary

2003-12-29 Thread John Van Essen
One thing that's bugged me is that some of the man page lines in the options summary are longer than 79 chars and wrap onto the next line. These are just one line summaries (detailed description appear later) so they can, and should, be terse. Here's an edited diff showing my proposed changes (an

Re: The dangers of static buffers in rsync code

2003-12-29 Thread Jim Salter
Fie on you, sir (although I mean that in the nicest possible way) - I'd like to see 2.6.0 get its head out the door. =) Jim Salter > Cristian Gafton wrote: It is a nasty trap, and if you agree that it should get fixed, I think it is better done as part of the 2.6.0 rollout than at some minor re

Re: The dangers of static buffers in rsync code

2003-12-29 Thread Cristian Gafton
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, jw schultz wrote: > How about an even smaller hammer. > In recv_generator do a strlcpy of arg1 to an automatic. That would work for this aprticular case I explained - however, the fact is that f_name() can change the value of the arguments passed around inhigher level funct

Re: Status of upcoming 2.6.0 release

2003-12-29 Thread Wayne Davison
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 02:04:47AM +, John Poltorak wrote: > Is there any chance of including [EMAIL PROTECTED]@ in Makefile.in? I committed that change last January, so it should already be in the 2.5.6 and 2.5.7 releases. ..wayne.. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.o

Re: The dangers of static buffers in rsync code

2003-12-29 Thread Wayne Davison
On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 04:55:19PM -0500, Cristian Gafton wrote: > I have been trying for quite a while now to understand why is the > flist.c:f_name() function implemented using static buffers. Anyone > care to comment? It's fairly handy for short-lived stuff, such as a printf() statement that ne

Re: Status of upcoming 2.6.0 release

2003-12-29 Thread John Poltorak
On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 01:32:53PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote: > The changes made to 2.6.0pre1 have been pretty minor so far, so I had > been debating whether we needed a pre2 release or not. I finally > decided to go ahead and release what little there is, just to give > folks a final opportunity

Re: rsync 2.5.7 link-dest seems broken

2003-12-29 Thread jw schultz
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 12:27:21AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi -- > > I'm experiencing problems when using rsync between two different machines. > Details follows: > > Both machines are running 2.4.23, rsync versions on both are identically > configured versions of 2.5.7: > > rsync

Re: Question about file ownership on destination

2003-12-29 Thread jw schultz
On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 03:26:53PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote: > On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 05:23:21PM -0500, acct svcs wrote: > > AFAIK, the daemon is running as root. > > Quoting from the rsyncd.conf file you cited: > > uid = server1 > gid = server1 > > Comment-out these lines. He

Unchanged file recopied + meaning of speedup (was: Is this correct?)

2003-12-29 Thread John Van Essen
(I changed the Subject to something less generic...) On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, kevin_david_carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am trying to copy an 8 gig file. After first copying it over I try > and rsync it again. There are no changes so why is it copying the > file over again? Here is the out

rsync 2.5.7 link-dest seems broken

2003-12-29 Thread gname
Hi -- I'm experiencing problems when using rsync between two different machines. Details follows: Both machines are running 2.4.23, rsync versions on both are identically configured versions of 2.5.7: rsync version 2.5.7 protocol version 26 Copyright (C) 1996-2002 by Andrew Tridgell and other

Re: Question about file ownership on destination

2003-12-29 Thread Wayne Davison
On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 05:23:21PM -0500, acct svcs wrote: > AFAIK, the daemon is running as root. Quoting from the rsyncd.conf file you cited: uid = server1 gid = server1 Comment-out these lines. ..wayne.. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/lis

Re: The dangers of static buffers in rsync code

2003-12-29 Thread jw schultz
On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 04:55:19PM -0500, Cristian Gafton wrote: > > I have been trying for quite a while now to understand why is the > flist.c:f_name() function implemented using static buffers. Anyone care to > comment? > > The immediate problem is that any call to f_name overrides the previ

Re: Question about file ownership on destination

2003-12-29 Thread acct svcs
Wayne, AFAIK, the daemon is running as root. Thjs is how I set it up under xinetd. As I understand it, in order for the chroot to work, it has to be root. This is also evidenced by the fact that it is running on rsync's default port which is under 1024. Joe From: Wayne Davison <[EMAIL PR

The dangers of static buffers in rsync code

2003-12-29 Thread Cristian Gafton
I have been trying for quite a while now to understand why is the flist.c:f_name() function implemented using static buffers. Anyone care to comment? The immediate problem is that any call to f_name overrides the previous content (well, obvious). This, combined with the fact that several functi

Is this correct?

2003-12-29 Thread kevin_david_carpenter
I am trying to copy an 8 gig file. After first copying it over I try and rsync it again. There are no changes so why is it copying the file over again? Here is the output of what I am trying to do. And what does speedup mean? [EMAIL PROTECTED] Storage]# rsync --verbose --recursive -t --stats --

Re: Question about file ownership on destination

2003-12-29 Thread Wayne Davison
On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 01:19:06PM -0500, acct svcs wrote: > The problem I have is that the files created on the destination still > appear to be owned by the local user (server1) on the rsync server. Which is the user you told rsync to run as. If you want any other user(s) to own the files, you

Question about file ownership on destination

2003-12-29 Thread acct svcs
Hello Regarding ownership on the destination: rsync's man page indicates that when synchronizing files to a remote host, -o implies the --numeric-ids option, which makes perfect sense aince the named users/groups may not exist on the destination host. The problem I have is that the files cre

Re: Does rsync/cygwin hanging problem be solved?

2003-12-29 Thread John Hunt
On Monday 29 Dec 2003 3:52 am, Zhang, Zhenhua wrote: > I am new user of rsync. > I notice rsync will hang under cygwin when transfering files > occasionally, then I see the mail archieve discussing this problem at > http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg08726.html > Does this bugs ha

Re: Does rsync/cygwin hanging problem be solved?

2003-12-29 Thread Wayne Davison
The rsync-on-cygwin hang problem looks like it will be fixed in the next cygwin release by their fixing a bug in cygwin's signal handling. In the meantime, there is a cygwin-specific version that has a patch that tries to kludge around the problem. Others who actually use the cygwin version will

Resource(s) in use

2003-12-29 Thread Michal Gronkowski
Hi, I am trying to sync 50Gb volume using Rsync 2.5.5, but get random errors like this one: "rename Skala/Plus/Kubek/.Kubas3.psd.001742 -> Skala/Plus/Kubek/Kubas3.psd : Resource(s) in use". Every rsync session the files which are "in use" are different. There is no other activity than rsync on rsyn

Re: Status of upcoming 2.6.0 release

2003-12-29 Thread Paul Slootman
I just noticed this in the rsyncd.conf manpage: .SH "VERSION" This man page is current for version 2\&.0 of rsync I'm sure that this can be updated to 2.6.0 :-) Paul Slootman -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.cat