Hi,
I'm part of the team that runs the Bioconductor project
http://bioconductor.org/
and we've used rsync successfully so far for a lot of different
things in particular for moving the hundreds of packages that we build
and check every day thru our build system pipe (which is made of several
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 06:39:03PM -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> Wayne, do you have a comment about the inclusion of --ignore-case?
I don't particularly like the option, so my current inclination is to
just keep it available in the patches directory for those that want it.
..wayne..
--
Please u
I have to move files from one host to another atomically (as much as
possible). I saw that rsync can remove files from the source, and it also
has a --delay-updates option for "more atomic" operation.
I.e. I use it like this: rsync --delay-updates --remove-source-files $1 $2
My question is, what
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 16:47 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 5/15/2008 4:31 PM, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 10:55 -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> >> Did [the --ignore-case] patch get included in the new 3.0.x standard
> >> version?
>
> > No.
>
> O-k... bummer. I thought i
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 16:31 -0400, Aaron Davies wrote:
> (unfortunately this tree is enormous and takes half an hour just to
> index, before any data actually starts moving, or i'd know if i've
> fixed that issue)
Rsync 3.0.x's incremental recursion mode will help with that, too.
Matt
signature
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 09:50 -0400, Aaron Davies wrote:
>> Hi, i have a question about rsyncing a tree which is largely
>> permissioned for read-only access(444/555, etc.). I have a production
>> environment which is mostly
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 09:50 -0400, Aaron Davies wrote:
> Hi, i have a question about rsyncing a tree which is largely
> permissioned for read-only access(444/555, etc.). I have a production
> environment which is mostly kept in r/o to make it harder to screw up,
> but parts of it are sometimes manu
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 13:11 +0200, Manfred Rebentisch wrote:
> some people want to use the following construction:
>
> they have a NAS machine with an integrated rsync (may be on embedded linux).
>
> they have a WinXP with cwRsyncServer (with rsync 3.0.2)
>
> and they have on WinXP a network sh
Hello Matt,
On Thu, 15 May 2008 11:54:33 -0400 Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gabriel,
>
> You sent this internal-looking message to the rsync list. If it
> pertains to rsync, would you please explain how?
Please ignore the former message, it was not intended to the rsync ML,
sor
Gabriel,
You sent this internal-looking message to the rsync list. If it
pertains to rsync, would you please explain how?
Matt
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 11:39 +0200, Gabriel CORRE wrote:
> Hello Rene,
>
> Maybe have you already upgrade you openssl/openssh packages if you using
> debian (or *buntu
Hi,
thank you, for your mail, but ... see below.
Am Donnerstag 15 Mai 2008 14:42 schrieb Stuart Halliday:
> > Hello,
> > some people want to use the following construction:
> >
> > they have a NAS machine with an integrated rsync (may be on embedded
> > linux).
> >
> > they have a WinXP with cwRs
Hi, i have a question about rsyncing a tree which is largely
permissioned for read-only access(444/555, etc.). I have a production
environment which is mostly kept in r/o to make it harder to screw up,
but parts of it are sometimes manually worked on (in emergencies,
etc.). I need to maintain a rem
> Hello,
> some people want to use the following construction:
>
> they have a NAS machine with an integrated rsync (may be on embedded
> linux).
>
> they have a WinXP with cwRsyncServer (with rsync 3.0.2)
>
> and they have on WinXP a network share (i.e. Y:
> == "//192.168.100.123/sharename")
Hello,
some people want to use the following construction:
they have a NAS machine with an integrated rsync (may be on embedded linux).
they have a WinXP with cwRsyncServer (with rsync 3.0.2)
and they have on WinXP a network share (i.e. Y:
== "//192.168.100.123/sharename")
They can use NAS /
Hello Rene,
Maybe have you already upgrade you openssl/openssh packages if you using debian
(or *buntu).
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.security.announce/1614
We have found some weak keys :
- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (sure)
- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (maybe)
Are you up to date ?
Can Fabrice se
15 matches
Mail list logo
