similar to: [Bug 1337] New: SCP performance twice as slow as RCP

Hi, With an rsync-2.6.4-3 client talking to an rsync-2.6.8-1.el4.rf server at least, the --ignore-times option seems not to be honoured? I.E. if I edit a file so that the mtime and size are the same, the file with the new data will not be transfered to the server. In case it's important, the full command I run is: rsync -viIaz --delete -e ssh . www.pixelbeat.org:'~/public_html'

Hi All, I am looking for SCP or RCP standards. I searched on the web but I am not able to find the standards. Please mail me the link where I can find the standards for SCP or RCP. Thanks, Abhijeet

I've run into a situation where we'd like to replace rcp with rsync, but we've run into a difference in interface, which is causing us problems. Here's the problem. If we run this in rsync: > mkdir tmpdir; cd tmpdir > mkdir a; touch a/b > rsync -r a b/ > ls b a/ But for all the other programs, we get something different: > cp -r a c/ > ls c foo > cp

I got used to rsync's -v --progress option so much that I used it instead of rcp even to simply copy files across the network. I dont like software that doesnt talk to me! :-) I like the percentage bar that --progress gives! To my surprise, I found that, when dealing with 1GB+ files, rsync is 4-5 _times_ slower than rcp. Yes, I know that rsync is optimized for sending deltas to a file

IF ssh is a replacement for rlogin,rsh etc I can accept it respecting rlogin=false as rlogin does and rsh does not, however scp is a replacement for rcp, and rcp does NOT use rlogin attribute, so the implementation is NOT standard as scp fails if rlogin=false, but rcp succeeds, as documented. thanks mark

Hi, I'm using linux 2.4.20 here and noticed that even when STP is disabled for a bridge, the forwarding delay still takes affect. Is this correct? I.E. Does the bridge need to spend time in the "listening" and "learning" states when STP isn't used? It's an easy work around to set the delay to 0, I'm just wondering whether it's a buglet or by design.

Hello world!!!! I realized that my samba_Server1 did not even UID & GID that the other samba_Server1 .. In summary: the share from the windows works very well. samba 1 and 2. When i run wbinfo-u (samba 1 and 2.) i'have : GUEST ADMINITRATOR .. but not [DOMAIN] GUEST [DOMAIN] ADMINITRATOR .. (strange...) When I run on samba_Server1: getent passwd guest: *: 604:608:

On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Red Cricket wrote: > I have had this in my .bashrc for years: > > alias scp='rsync -avzP' Similar, though I named it rcp because nobody has the real rcp installed any more, but sometimes I need scp to connect to systems that lack rsync. https://evolvis.org/plugins/scmgit/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=shellsnippets/shellsnippets.git;a=blob;f=mksh/rcp;hb=HEAD >

If the source and destination file are identical, the receiving scp truncates the file. On the sending end, read() returns 0, and garbage is sent instead of actual data, and the receiving end puts it into the file, which at least confuses the users. -- Florian Weimer Florian.Weimer at RUS.Uni-Stuttgart.DE University of Stuttgart http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=485 djm at mindrot.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From djm at mindrot.org 2003-06-04 23:28

Why can the local and remote paths be sanitized? Regards, Uri > On Jul 31, 2020, at 19:57, Ethan Rahn <ethan.rahn at gmail.com> wrote: > > ?I wanted to bring this up again due to: > https://github.com/cpandya2909/CVE-2020-15778/. This showcases a clear > issue with scp which it sounds like cannot be fixed without breaking scp. > This seems like it would lend some impetus

Dear developers, I discovered that directories created by scp when recursive copying into a sgid directory do not inherit the sgid bit. I believe this is a bug. A patch to fix this is attached. Regards, Petr Skovron -------------- next part -------------- --- scp.c.orig 2005-10-11 16:50:17.000000000 +0200 +++ scp.c 2005-10-11 16:57:25.000000000 +0200 @@ -876,8 +876,12 @@

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=882 Summary: Scp cannot copy self-referring directories Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 3.8p1 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P2 Component: scp AssignedTo: openssh-bugs at mindrot.org ReportedBy:

[These two patches are for discussion only] Allow FUSE support to be used directly through the API. This is the second commit. In order to make this usable from guestfish, we have to also bind the events API in guestfish. This is the first commit. Rich.

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=801 Summary: Improve usability of scp by adding a "make path" option Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: -current Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: scp AssignedTo: openssh-bugs at mindrot.org

Dear openssh people, Here's something to try: $ echo a >a $ echo b >b $ echo c >c $ $ scp a b c $ $ echo $? 1 $ cat a b c a b b Ouch! Also, for comparison: $ cp a b c cp: copying multiple files, but last argument `c' is not a directory Try `cp --help' for more information. $ rcp a b c rcp: c: Not a directory. $ Note that the cp behavior is specified in SuSv2.

Has anyone had a problem with scp not retaining ACLs set on the original file under Solaris 8? When I have a file that has ACLs set and I use scp or rsync -e ssh to copy the file (local->local or local->remote) the ACLs are gone from the copied file(s). Is this a known issue or am I just missing something (a flag for instance) when performing the copy? Thanks in advance for your help.

Hello, For some time now, our users have been encountering a problem when using scp to overwrite files on our mass-storage system, which uses SGI's DMF product. I don't have any data as to whether or not any other HSMs would be similarly affected. The scenario is that a user is overwriting a file (via scp) that has previously been migrated to tape. The scp opens the file for writing, but

By making a one-line change it is possible to enable the cipher 'none' in openssh. But you still have to ask for it explicitly, either by adding it to /etc/ssh/ssh_config or by giving the '-c none' option to ssh. I think that this 'feature' should be turned back on, because for slow machines or large file transfers, using encryption slows things down a lot. This means

Hello, I apologize if this isn't the right place to post about the Google Summer of Code; if so, I would appreciate guidance toward the correct list. If this is the correct list, I would appreciate answers to the message below. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Jawaad Ahmad <jawaadahmad32 at webster.edu> To: djm at openssh.com Subject: OpenSSH GSoC Project Date: Thu, 19 Mar