Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "free_acl".
Did you mean:
free4all
2010 Jun 02
1
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7489] New: rsyncd segfaults using daemon exclude filter
....fs_*/***
.snap*/***
which matches, and the daemon dumps core.
The problem appears in versions 3.0.6, 3.0.7 & HEAD, it is in generator.c.
There is an error path that takes a 'goto' that skips the initialization of sx
struct, then the cleanup tries to free random memory with a call to
free_acl(&sx). In acls.c the free is
void free_acl(stat_x *sxp)
{
if (sxp->acc_acl) {
rsync_acl_free(sxp->acc_acl);
free(sxp->acc_acl); <<<<<<< uninitialized
In version 3.0.6 the 'bad' goto is at line 1315:...
2006 Nov 10
1
Internal error: wrong write used in receiver.
Hi,
I'm using 2.6.9 but I get:
recv_files phase=1
generate_files phase=2
recv_files phase=2
recv_files finished
generate_files phase=3
deleting in home
delete_in_dir(home)
[generator] make_file(home/administ,*,2)
Internal error: wrong write used in receiver.
_exit_cleanup(code=2, file=io.c, line=1204): entered
_exit_cleanup(code=19, file=main.c, line=1182): entered
rsync error: received
2006 Dec 01
1
Bug#401189: rsync: using rltvz options spews sys_acl_get_file messages
...s errno == ENOSYS instead of errno == ENOTSUP.
I've come up with the following quick patch, but have no idea whether
that is the right thing to do in these circumstances:
--- acls.c.orig 2006-12-01 16:16:07.000000000 +0100
+++ acls.c 2006-12-01 16:16:43.000000000 +0100
@@ -515,7 +515,7 @@
free_acl(sxp);
return -1;
}
- } else if (errno == ENOTSUP) {
+ } else if (errno == ENOTSUP || errno == ENOSYS) {
/* ACLs are not supported, so pretend we have a basic ACL. */
if (type == SMB_ACL_TYPE_ACCESS)
rsync_acl_fake_perms(racl, sxp->st.st_mode);
@@ -1058,6 +1058,9 @@
if (...
2012 Jun 09
2
[patch] NFSv4/ZFS ACLs
This is a PoC patch for NFSv4/ZFS ACLs.
The objective of the patch is that rsync --acls support NFSv4/ZFS ACLs
without requiring a new command line option
NFSv4 ACLs can't be represented using POSIX draft ACLs, if an NFSv4 ACL is
present a separate POSIX draft ACL will not be present and there are new
APIs
to access NFSv4 ACLs. So we need to distinguish between NFSv4 ACLs and
POSIX
ACLs in