rsync - May 2008 - Step between --dry-run and running?

Hi,

	Is there either a step, or a recipe for a step between
--dry-run and actually running?

	In a particular instance, --dry-run isn't enough. I want
to actually attempt to read the entire file in, but then write
it out to nowhere. I'm trying to see if it generates any disk
errors that may hurt during an actual transfer. I realize 2
minutes later I could do the read again for the real transfer
and it would fail, but I'm hoping there is an incredibly slim
chance thats the case.

	The reason I want to do this is that I'm trying to
capture if/when there are read errors on the sending disk.
I've ended up with corrupt files and didn't know until it
was too late. (NOTE: This last happened to me in 2003 with
"rsync  version 2.5.6  protocol version 26" . My concerns
may be totally unfounded since then, and if so I'm sorry
but please let me know. I've used rsync pretty much weekly
since then, and haven't run into the problem, but then again
I haven't had a disk fail that I didn't know prior)

		Thanks, Tuc

On Sat, 2008-05-31 at 14:35 -0400, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET
wrote:
> 	Is there either a step, or a recipe for a step between
> --dry-run and actually running?
> 
> 	In a particular instance, --dry-run isn't enough. I want
> to actually attempt to read the entire file in, but then write
> it out to nowhere. I'm trying to see if it generates any disk
> errors that may hurt during an actual transfer.
That would be --only-write-batch.

Matt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url :
http://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/attachments/20080531/10ab3985/attachment.bin