samba-bugs@samba.org
2007-Sep-23 00:28 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4985] New: --list-only shows implied dirs even with --no-implied-dirs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4985
Summary: --list-only shows implied dirs even with --no-implied-
dirs
Product: rsync
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: core
AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org
ReportedBy: hashproduct+rsync@gmail.com
QAContact: rsync-qa@samba.org
I noticed that the current CVS rsync lists implied dirs in --list-only mode,
even if given --no-implied-dirs. Is this behavior intended? IMHO, it would be
better to omit entries for implied dirs from the list like rsync 2.6.9 did
because they are an implementation detail and do not carry any information of
significance to the user. At the very least, showing their source attributes
is misleading because (as the man page description of --no-implied-dirs states)
the attributes are never applied to the destination.
To see the current behavior, run:
mkdir -p a/b
chmod 3756 a # Notice that this wacky mode appears in the listing
# even though the receiver doesn't apply it.
rsync -a -R --no-implied-dirs --list-only a/b
The result:
drwxr-srwT 72 2007/09/22 20:24:55 a
drwx------ 48 2007/09/22 20:24:55 a/b
--
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.
samba-bugs@samba.org
2007-Sep-23 02:02 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4985] --list-only shows implied dirs even with --no-implied-dirs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4985
wayned@samba.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
------- Comment #1 from wayned@samba.org 2007-09-22 21:02 CST -------
That was just an oversight. There were some other list-only problems with
inc_recurse mode that I also fixed.
--
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.
Reasonably Related Threads
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3543] New: [ACL] rsync calls default_perms_for_dir on omitted implied dirs before ensuring they exist
- Improvements to man page for --no-implied-dirs and --keep-dirlinks
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4412] New: --dry-run output inaccurate due to implied symlink
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3549] New: rsync applies umask to some directories even when a default ACL takes effect
- DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4080] New: rsync can't find basis dirs with -n and nonexistent destination