Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "send_null_sum".
Did you mean:
send_null_sums
2002 Apr 23
1
patch: timeout problem solved
...+49 431 988-1260
-------------- next part --------------
--- rsync-2.5.5/generator.c Mon Mar 25 06:54:31 2002
+++ rsync-2.5.5-gen/generator.c Tue Apr 23 01:51:32 2002
@@ -102,28 +102,12 @@
/*
send a sums struct down a fd
*/
-static void send_sums(struct sum_struct *s, int f_out)
+static void send_null_sums(int f_out)
{
- if (s) {
- size_t i;
-
- /* tell the other guy how many we are going to be
- doing and how many bytes there are in the last
- chunk */
- write_int(f_out, s->count);
- write_int(f_out, s->n);
- write_int(f_out, s->remainder);
-
- for (i = 0; i < s->count...
2003 Mar 23
1
[RFC] dynamic checksum size
...hes block checksums. I found
that there was a great deal of code duplication involved
with reading and writing the sum_struct fields. I have
eliminated the duplication by consolidating that transmission
in the new (read|write)_sum_head functions. A added bonus
is that write_sum_head replaces the send_null_sums function.
The Adleresque checksum1 is in no way affected.
The varsumlen patch builds on that groundwork by
implementing a simple heuristic to generate the per-file
sum2 lengths. It remains two bytes until the file is 8193
blocks at which it increments and continues incrementing
each time the blo...
2003 Mar 30
1
[RFC][patch] dynamic rolling block and sum sizes II
...s,
int ai_family, int ai_socktype,
--- generator.c Sat Mar 29 11:11:30 2003
+++ generator.c Sat Mar 29 12:16:02 2003
@@ -116,13 +116,21 @@
/*
- send a header that says "we have no checksums" down the f_out fd
+ * NULL sum_struct means we have no checksums
*/
-static void send_null_sums(int f_out)
+
+void write_sum_head(int f, struct sum_struct *sum)
{
- write_int(f_out, 0);
- write_int(f_out, block_size);
- write_int(f_out, 0);
+ static struct sum_struct null_sum;
+
+ if (sum == (struct sum_struct *)NULL)
+ sum = &null_sum;
+
+ write_int(f, sum->count);
+ write_int(f, s...