rsync - Mar 2004 - Bug report: sender needs to have backup-dir

With this patch (see URL), backup-dir is passed to the server.  It's not 
currently ignored on the other end if irrelevant (which it is for 
senders).  Either we should not pass it, or let the sender ignore it 
later on.

http://cvs.samba.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/rsync/options.c.diff?r1=1.109&r2=1.110&f=h

Either we should not pass it, or tell a sender to ignore it later on.  
Happy to whip up a patch either way...

Kenneth

On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 08:19:02AM -0500, kenneth topp
wrote:
> With this patch (see URL), backup-dir is passed to the server.
Yeah, that change did get made in 2.6.0 (though I don't currently
remember exactly why).

Regardless, you weren't entirely clear what prompted you to mention
this.  Inefficiency?  Or a compatibility bug?

In thinking about multi-version compatibility, it seems to me that if a
2.5.x client/receiver was running a 2.6.0 server/sender that the
--suffix option would get passed on, but not --backup-dir.  Thus, if the
suffix was null, the 2.6.0 rsync would complain.  So, I think this
change would fix this:

-       } else if (!backup_suffix_len) {
+	} else if (!backup_suffix_len && (!am_server || !am_sender)) {

That way we only complain if we're the client (even if we're the sender
we still have all the args directly from the user) OR if we're a
server/receiver.

..wayne..