Re: 2.6.0 file has vanished fails to set exit code on local client
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 11:45:22PM -0600, John Van Essen wrote: But as I mentioned, it also happens with a daemon Yeah, the daemon's exit code is not available to the client, so it is getting lost. I've committed a patch that will cause a daemon sender to go ahead and use FERROR for the vanished-file message if it is talking with a pre-28 protocol (I'm going to put an exit-code message into protocol 28). ..wayne.. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: 2.6.0 file has vanished fails to set exit code on local client
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Wayne Davison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 11:45:22PM -0600, John Van Essen wrote: But as I mentioned, it also happens with a daemon Yeah, the daemon's exit code is not available to the client, so it is getting lost. I've committed a patch that will cause a daemon sender to go ahead and use FERROR for the vanished-file message if it is talking with a pre-28 protocol (I'm going to put an exit-code message into protocol 28). Sounds good. BTW, fixing the exit code bug in my rsync trigger script solved my exit code reporting problem. Rsync client now ends with: wrote 415849 bytes read 22037678 bytes 18797.43 bytes/sec total size is 6033963241 speedup is 268.73 rsync warning: some files vanished before they could be transfered (code 24) at main.c(1064) My script then reports: rsync exited with exit code 24 after 1195 seconds Exit Code 24 means a source file vanished. That's OK. Thanks again for the tip about the exit code not being returned from the remote shell. :) -- John Van Essen Univ of MN Alumnus [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Ownership lost: linux - windows - linux
Hi, I have a problem of loss of file ownership with rsync. For some odd reasons, I have to use a windows machine as rsync server, and to backup/restore a filesystem from/to a linux client. All files in my linux filesystem are owned by root, with gid root. If I save the files onto the windows rsync server from linux using rsync, and then restore them back to linux, the ownership for all files changes, becoming uid=400, gid=401. All other file attributes are correctly preserved, including read/write permissions and even setuid bits. Could you help me solving this problem? On windows I'm using cwRsync 1.1.0 on a 2003 server. Here is my rsyncd.conf on windows: --- start of rsyncd.conf use chroot = false strict modes = false hosts allow = * log file = rsyncd.log pid file = rsyncd.pid [myalias] path = /cygdrive/c/cwrsync/data/mydir read only = false transfer logging = yes --- end of rsyncd.conf On linux I'm using rsync 2.5.6, launching it with this syntax: /usr/local/bin/rsync -a -v -c --progress --stats rsync://IPADDRESS/ALIAS LOCALDIR Thank you for any help. -- Pier Paolo Glave __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
2.6.0 backwards compatibility
Hello all, I saw on the Release notes that 2.6.0 is using protocol version 27 which is different than 2.5.7 and 2.5.6. I did a quick peak through the rest of the release notes and quickly browsed the archives on the list and I didn't see any notes on how well 2.6.0 works with older versions of rsync. At our site, we do have 2.5.7 and 2.5.6 installed. Are there any documented problems when using 2.6.0 with a down revved version on another system? Thanks much, Ben Piela Please do not transmit orders or instructions regarding a UBS account by email. The information provided in this email or any attachments is not an official transaction confirmation or account statement. For your protection, do not include account numbers, Social Security numbers, credit card numbers, passwords or other non-public information in your email. Because the information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, proprietary or otherwise protected from disclosure, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer if you have received this communication in error. Thank you. UBS Financial Services Inc. UBS International Inc. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Ownership lost: linux - windows - linux
Hi, I want to make sure that cwRsync is NOT a separate product/solution or whatever. It is simply a packaging of rsync on cygwin to make deployment/installation easier. cwRsync is a minimalist environment and does not support keeping ownership information between transfers. You should go for a full blown cygwin environment and use CYGWIN=ntsec if you really find out what support you can expect. I suspect that you may have a limited success, since Cygwin is a Linux emulation layer on Windows and Windows with NTFS filesystem has a quite complicated ACL system. Rgrds Tev cwRsync maintainer -- Original Message --- From: Pier Paolo Glave [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 08:06:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ownership lost: linux - windows - linux Hi, I have a problem of loss of file ownership with rsync. For some odd reasons, I have to use a windows machine as rsync server, and to backup/restore a filesystem from/to a linux client. All files in my linux filesystem are owned by root, with gid root. If I save the files onto the windows rsync server from linux using rsync, and then restore them back to linux, the ownership for all files changes, becoming uid=400, gid=401. All other file attributes are correctly preserved, including read/write permissions and even setuid bits. Could you help me solving this problem? On windows I'm using cwRsync 1.1.0 on a 2003 server. Here is my rsyncd.conf on windows: --- start of rsyncd.conf use chroot = false strict modes = false hosts allow = * log file = rsyncd.log pid file = rsyncd.pid [myalias] path = /cygdrive/c/cwrsync/data/mydir read only = false transfer logging = yes --- end of rsyncd.conf On linux I'm using rsync 2.5.6, launching it with this syntax: /usr/local/bin/rsync -a -v -c --progress --stats rsync://IPADDRESS/ALIAS LOCALDIR Thank you for any help. -- Pier Paolo Glave __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html --- End of Original Message --- -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: rsync backup
Norman Zhang wrote: John Davis wrote: I want to mirror a samba server (smb0) to a identical server (smb1) in my internal network. So far I can managed to do this from client (smb1), rsync -e ssh -auzpg 10.10.10.24:/home/MYDOMAIN /home rsync -e ssh -auzpg 10.10.10.24:/srv/ /srv I would like to automate this task without entering root password. But I'm little confused. Should I setup rsyncd.conf from the server and setuid/setgid for access? Then initiate connection from client with above commands using CRON? That's one way. You could also do it with an expect script (use autoexpect), or you can tell your SSH server to authenticate with an SSH key. If you do it that way, you won't be prompted for a password. It's what I do for all of my remote servers. Sorry. Do you mean the way I have would still prompt for password? Would you mind sharing your script? I've setup SSH for auto login. It seems I can just do rsync -e ssh -aupg 10.10.10.24:/home/MYDOMAIN /home fine Do I still need /etc/rsyncd.conf on the server? Regards, Norman -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: 2.6.0 backwards compatibility
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 01:08:34PM -0500, Piela, Ben wrote: Hello all, I saw on the Release notes that 2.6.0 is using protocol version 27 which is different than 2.5.7 and 2.5.6. I did a quick peak through the rest of the release notes and quickly browsed the archives on the list and I didn't see any notes on how well 2.6.0 works with older versions of rsync. At our site, we do have 2.5.7 and 2.5.6 installed. Are there any documented problems when using 2.6.0 with a down revved version on another system? The code is designed to allow backward compatability. When a newer version is communicating with an older the will use the highest common protocol version. We do limit the backwards compatability somewhat and will exit with an error if you try to connect between incompatible versions. Beginning with 2.6.0 there is also a warning if connecting to a version that may not be supported by the next release. In addition to the protocol errors there may be newer command-line options so if you are using a new client and try to use a command-line option not supported by an older server the server will exit with an error message. For the most part you don't need to worry about the protocol versions. On the other hand in addition to feature enhancements, over time we fix bugs and improve performance and if you do have problems only limited support is given to older versions. As for your situation 2.5.6 and 2.5.7 are not that old. Some distributions are still shipping much older versions. -- J.W. SchultzPegasystems Technologies email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Remember Cernan and Schmitt -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Resolving problems in the generator-receiver pipes
When I was working on the the hard-link change, I noticed that many of the hard-link verbose messages were getting lost. These messages get output very near the end of the transfer, and it turns out that the reason for the loss was that there are two pipes flowing from the generator and the receiver, and it was possible for the we're all done message to get received down the redo pipe without all of the messages getting sent down the error pipe. It's also a long- known bug that the redo pipe can clog (but only if a really large number of redo items build up). In looking at this code, I figured out that it would be much better to just dump the redo pipe and use the error pipe as a message pipe. Since it already uses the same transfer protocol as the multiplexed IO between other components, it turned out to be a very simple thing to add a REDO and a DONE message to the existing code. This gets rid of the redo pipe and all of its problems. At the same time I though it would be good to separate the existing message-sending code out of the log-file code. This is because one other non-logging message is already supported (the data stream in multiplexed IO) so the addition of two extra messages makes it a better fit for the io.c code than the log.c code (i.e. when the log code needs to send a message to another program, it calls the code in io.c to do it instead of doing it itself). Finally, the flushing code was tweaked to allow it to signal that the writing out of the receiver-generator pipe should be completely flushed (from the in-memory list of messages). This allows the final flushing to complete more efficiently than calling io_flush() in a loop. In my exuberance for having finally solved the redo-hang problem in a much better way than my previous suggested fixes for it, I went ahead and checked in my changes. However, feedback is still gratefully accepted. The changes can be found here: http://www.blorf.net/redo.patch ..wayne.. -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Resolving problems in the generator-receiver pipes
On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 12:11:39PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote: When I was working on the the hard-link change, I noticed that many of the hard-link verbose messages were getting lost. These messages get output very near the end of the transfer, and it turns out that the reason for the loss was that there are two pipes flowing from the generator and the receiver, and it was possible for the we're all done message to get received down the redo pipe without all of the messages getting sent down the error pipe. It's also a long- known bug that the redo pipe can clog (but only if a really large number of redo items build up). In looking at this code, I figured out that it would be much better to just dump the redo pipe and use the error pipe as a message pipe. Since it already uses the same transfer protocol as the multiplexed IO between other components, it turned out to be a very simple thing to add a REDO and a DONE message to the existing code. This gets rid of the redo pipe and all of its problems. At the same time I though it would be good to separate the existing message-sending code out of the log-file code. This is because one other non-logging message is already supported (the data stream in multiplexed IO) so the addition of two extra messages makes it a better fit for the io.c code than the log.c code (i.e. when the log code needs to send a message to another program, it calls the code in io.c to do it instead of doing it itself). Finally, the flushing code was tweaked to allow it to signal that the writing out of the receiver-generator pipe should be completely flushed (from the in-memory list of messages). This allows the final flushing to complete more efficiently than calling io_flush() in a loop. In my exuberance for having finally solved the redo-hang problem in a much better way than my previous suggested fixes for it, I went ahead and checked in my changes. However, feedback is still gratefully accepted. The changes can be found here: http://www.blorf.net/redo.patch What i looked at from the cvs digest looked like decent code. It was just lacking the overview you provided here. This sounds pretty good. Just needs some thorough testing. -- J.W. SchultzPegasystems Technologies email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Remember Cernan and Schmitt -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: rsync backup
I've setup SSH for auto login. It seems I can just do rsync -e ssh -aupg 10.10.10.24:/home/MYDOMAIN /home fine Do I still need /etc/rsyncd.conf on the server? Nope. I do the same thing, and I've never needed it. -Chuck -- http://www.quantumlinux.com Quantum Linux Laboratories, LLC. ACCELERATING Business with Open Technology The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit. - FDR -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Rsync and windows sharing
Hi, I search a way to do rsync on a window share without mount the share. Why ? because i don't want to run my script as root for mount and unmount the share. (it's bad to run scripts as root :-) ) Alternative way is to install rsync on [EMAIL PROTECTED], but i can't because windows computer are not mine. Why rsync (made by the creator of Samba) can't read a window share ? Can't interact with smbclient ? I'm using rsync 2.5.7 on FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE with options NETSMB, NETSMBCRYPTO and SMBFS in kernel. Thanks for answers and solutions Erwan Breton -- To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
CVS update: rsync
Date: Thu Jan 15 07:42:15 2004 Author: wayned Update of /data/cvs/rsync In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv14588 Modified Files: generator.c Log Message: We now call get_redo_num() instead of reading f_recv (which was removed). Revisions: generator.c 1.69 = 1.70 http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/rsync/generator.c.diff?r1=1.69r2=1.70 ___ rsync-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync-cvs
CVS update: rsync
Date: Thu Jan 15 07:42:27 2004 Author: wayned Update of /data/cvs/rsync In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv14672 Modified Files: rsync.h Log Message: - Define FULL_FLUSH and NORMAL_FLUSH. - Got rid of FNONE from logcode enum. - Created msgcode enum with MSG_DATA, MSG_REDO, MSG_DONE, etc. Revisions: rsync.h 1.172 = 1.173 http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/rsync/rsync.h.diff?r1=1.172r2=1.173 ___ rsync-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync-cvs
CVS update: rsync
Date: Thu Jan 15 07:51:37 2004 Author: wayned Update of /data/cvs/rsync In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv17362 Modified Files: NEWS Log Message: Improved receiver/generator communications. Revisions: NEWS1.143 = 1.144 http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/rsync/NEWS.diff?r1=1.143r2=1.144 ___ rsync-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync-cvs
CVS update: rsync
Date: Thu Jan 15 17:45:53 2004 Author: wayned Update of /data/cvs/rsync In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv2411 Modified Files: rsync.yo rsync.1 Log Message: Clarified the --delete-after descriptions. Revisions: rsync.yo1.138 = 1.139 http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/rsync/rsync.yo.diff?r1=1.138r2=1.139 rsync.1 1.154 = 1.155 http://www.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/rsync/rsync.1.diff?r1=1.154r2=1.155 ___ rsync-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync-cvs
