rsync - Mar 2006 - buffer overflow in receive_file_entry

I have rsync 2.6.6 on unix source to a cygwin setup on a Windows 2003
server. Was working well, then I moved a folder down one subdirectory
and started getting the following. I assume this means it is having
problems with the length of the file name? I have the same problem with
long file names using cwRsync. Are there any options other than
modifying the file names?

backup# ./820.remote-backup
No matching processes were found
No matching processes were found
rsync: readdir("/home/backup/Ydrive/tpgsharedfiles/ACCTS/FELCOR/Crowne
Plaza Secaucus - Meadowlands/Due Diligence Materials for Website"): Bad
file descriptor (9)
rsync: readdir("/home/backup/Ydrive/tpgsharedfiles/ACCTS/MeriStar/South
Seas Resort"): Bad file descriptor (9)
overflow: flags=0x3a l1=124 l2=137
lastname=Ydrive/tpgsharedfiles/ACCTS/Goldman Sachs/Wyndham Westshore/Due
Diligence/CD Content/20. - Property Condition Report/28.20.03 ENSR
Property Condition Assessment dated June 1997 vol.
2/28.20.03_ENSR_Property_Condition_Assessment_dated_June_1997_vol._3.pdf
ERROR: buffer overflow in receive_file_entry
rsync error: error allocating core memory buffers (code 22)
at /home/lapo/packaging/tmp/rsync-2.6.6/util.c(126)
rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (8 bytes received so far) [sender]
rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at io.c(443) 

I googled a bit and found the following, is this patch a possibility? How would
I apply that to my cygwin package?

http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2005-April/012104.html

-- 
Robert

P.S. - Sorry for the word wrap, I have not figured out how to avoid in
Evo 2.4

On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 07:22:22PM -0500, Robert Fitzpatrick
wrote:
> I assume this means it is having problems with the length of the file
> name?
Yes.  The output you cited indicates that the combined filename would be
124+137 = 261 bytes, which overflows the horrendously small MAXPATHLEN
size under MS Windows.  The only way to work around this at present is
to start the transfer deeper in the hierarchy.  (The patch you cited is
for something different, and is already present in 2.6.6.)

..wayne..