samba-bugs@samba.org
2005-Oct-14 11:42 UTC
[Bug 3168] New: --min-size cores in 2.6.5 and is completely missing in 2.6.6
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3168 Summary: --min-size cores in 2.6.5 and is completely missing in 2.6.6 Product: rsync Version: 2.6.6 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: foner-rsync-bugzilla@media.mit.edu QAContact: rsync-qa@samba.org CC: foner-rsync-bugzilla@media.mit.edu --min-size is documented in 2.6.5 (manpage and --help) but segfaults in any command I've tried it in. It's vanished in 2.6.6, and seems to exist only as an unofficial patch. Why is that? I don't understand why --max-size is there but --min-size isn't, and the misleading documentation of --min-size in 2.6.5's --help just screwed me, since I've been mere hours from setting up a backup system that depended on its presence. (--max-size worked just fine in testing; imagine my surprise when --min-size cored and compiling the latest rsync caused it to vanish altogether!) I'm on the mailing list and see no discussion of this change from the April timeframe, which was when I thought it went into the mainline rsync. It's also apparently not mentioned in any NEWS file. And searching for it in the bugzilla hasn't turned up anything relevant. Can this please be committed to the mainline version? P.S. I -am- very pleased to see that --max-size, at least, worked when pulling files from a 2.6.3 to a 2.6.5; I wasn't sure a priori if that would work, since it wasn't clear who might be doing the filtering. (My guess is, "the sender if it supports it, otherwise the receiver", but that's just a guess.) I'm hoping that adding --min-size won't break this behavior, since the rsync I'm pulling from may have to stay at 2.6.3 for a while. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.