rsync - Sep 2018 - [Bug 13615] New: Output of --list-only not as I expected re: symlinks

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13615

            Bug ID: 13615
           Summary: Output of --list-only not as I expected re: symlinks
           Product: rsync
           Version: 3.1.3
          Hardware: x64
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P5
         Component: core
          Assignee: wayned at samba.org
          Reporter: michael at redmule.com
        QA Contact: rsync-qa at samba.org

The output of --list-only isn't as I expected as regards symlinks. Here are
my
test files:

$ ls ./src
-rw-------  1 michael michael    0 2018-09-05 09:18:15 file
lrwxrwxrwx  1 michael michael    4 2018-09-05 09:18:28 near_symlink -> file
-rw-------  1 michael michael    0 2018-09-13 12:39:41 exclude
lrwxrwxrwx  1 michael michael    4 2018-09-13 12:40:47 far_symlink -> /etc

I want to know which files are candidates to transfer. I don't want symlinks
to
transfer. I run it with --list-only :

$ rsync -r --no-links --list-only --exclude="/excl*" ./src/
drwx------          4,096 2018/09/13 12:40:47 .
lrwxrwxrwx              4 2018/09/13 12:40:47 far_symlink
-rw-------              0 2018/09/05 09:18:15 file
lrwxrwxrwx              4 2018/09/05 09:18:28 near_symlink

This seems to indicate the symlinks are expected to transfer. Note that
--list-only correctly handles exclusions.

But when I actually run the transfer, the symlinks are not transferred:

$ rsync -r --no-links --exclude="/excl*" ./src/ ./dest
skipping non-regular file "far_symlink"
skipping non-regular file "near_symlink"

$ ls ./dest
-rw-------  1 michael michael    0 2018-09-13 12:49:06 file

So it seems like --list-only is not being truthful as regards symlinks. Or else
I misunderstand the purpose of --list-only.

So I am submitting a request to either:
 a) correct the output of --list-only, or
 b) have the purpose and intended use case of --list-only be better explained
in the docs.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13615

Wayne Davison <wayned at samba.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX

--- Comment #1 from Wayne Davison <wayned at samba.org> ---
The --list-only option just tells rsync to do some remote file listings. You
should use --dry-run if you want to know what a transfer is going to do.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13615

--- Comment #2 from Michael Hipp <michael at redmule.com> ---
I'm sorry, I don't understand. The first line in the docs says:

"This option will cause the source files to be listed instead of
transferred."

It doesn't say anything about "remote". It would seem to be a
viable way to
list the files that rsync will consider as candidates to transfer.

It obeys the exclusions and such, why does it not obey such for its treatment
of symlinks?

Using --dry-run isn't really a substitute as it requires a connection to the
remote server (destination) in the case of an ssh transfer. So it cannot be
used if that remote server is not accessible.

Is there any way to get a "correct" list of the files rsync will
consider as
candidates to transfer, but without making an unnecessary connection to the
remote end?

Thanks.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13615

--- Comment #3 from Kevin Korb <rsync at sanitarium.net> ---
I believe I talked to you in IRC about which is why I didn't respond when
this
was first posted but I think I can help explain this better...

The --list-only option is to turn rsync into a network capable ls.  It allows
you to look around a remote filesystem that you can only access via rsync over
ssh or rsyncd.  It kinda implements some rsync options to kinda do more of what
ls can do but it is still a bit of a kludge to allow you to look around.  For
local stuff using ls is a much better idea.

That being said, if you want rsync output even if your target is unavailable
you can always talk to localhost.  You can do something like:
rsync --verbose --archive --itemize-changes --dry-run --ignore-times ./
localhost:`pwd`/

The --ignore-times is there so rsync will think all files need to be copied and
therefore they will always all be listed.  Otherwise ./ and localhost:`pwd`/
will always be identical and nothing would be listed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13615

--- Comment #4 from Michael Hipp <michael at redmule.com> ---
(In reply to Kevin Korb from comment #3)

Thanks for the explanation. I would encourage someone to consider updating the
documentation to be more like what you wrote - as what I get from reading the
man page is nothing at all like that.
> rsync --verbose --archive --itemize-changes --dry-run --ignore-times ./
localhost:`pwd`/
Thanks for this. I will give it a try when I get back on that project.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.