similar to: why fd passing?

This problem has persisted for as long as I've used rsync. When the --delete option is used, not all files are deleted from the target, even though said files are not present in the source. The particular cases that cause this are when the target has a directory with files, and the source is something else, at least a symlink (this is the case I have seen). I'm taking a guess to say that

I'm trying to set up a machine which will be running multiple instances of NSD to serve different sets of zones from different interfaces. What I'm running into is that I can't specify different PID files to refer to on the command line. Are there any shortcuts or do I need to go write a patch? Any other implications of multiple instances? --

I was under the impression that --include and --exclude worked by matching patterns in the order given, and whichever matched first, whether that was an include or exclude determined the action for that file. I have a big directory from which I am attempting to transfer selected files. I want all files where the first level directory is anything, the second level directory is "2005"

A while back, I asked if there had been any consideration in making rsync support direct ssl (as opposed to just ssh). I've been looking around for a secure way (e.g. encrypted, so passwords are never in the clear, and even content is obscured from sniffers) to allow a set of limited-trust users (limited-trust being defined as mostly customers, whom you trust with their own data, but not with

My understanding of the man page description of --exclude vs. --include is that the list of these is kept in order, and file names are searched against these parameters in that order for the first that matches and that one makes the decision. It doesn't seem to be working exactly as expected. But there is a factor involved that's making it unclear, which is whether or not *'s should

It guess I still haven't figured out the entire sematics of the --include and --exclude options. From reading the man page, it seems to say that what happens is that each file being checked is tested against each pattern in order, and when one matches the tests end, and whether it is --include or --exclude determines if that file is included or excluded. So I have on my server a big file

I think someone posted this before, but I can't find it in the archives. I am using rsync to pull down source files to be compiled. The delete options are used to clear out any old files left over from previous. Normally this works. I've run into one case where it persistently fails. Within the directory created during compiling is a symlink to another directory, also created during

After doing a fresh extraction of the source for 2.6.0, I execute ./configure and it enters a loop with no output before or during. I let run 20 minutes just to see if it would ever do anything and it did nothing else. Host system has: Linux: 2.4.23 Slakcware: 9.0 bash: 2.05b.0 gcc: 3.2.2 glibc: 2.3.1 I have a big (huge) strace of it here:

Under certain circumstances (repeatable with a workaround) the client in openssh-2.1.1p3 and p4 closes file descriptors and then calls select() with the stderr one in the write fd_set. The circumstances which cause this appears to be that the closing of stdin/stdout/stderr occurs before the last of the stderr data is written to stderr. This occurs when a tty is not allocated, but the error

I get this error: ============================================================================= KLIBCCC usr/kinit/resume.o usr/kinit/resume.c:15:66: linux/config.h: No such file or directory make[2]: *** [usr/kinit/resume.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [all] Error 2 make: *** [klibc] Error 2 ============================================================================= There is no linux/config.h in

How hard would it be to have rsync do the file recursion scan on both the source tree and the destination tree at the same time in parallel? Would that require a protocol change, or could just a program change be enough? I have some very large directories I'd like to syncronize. Total time to scan through these millions of files is a substantial portion of an hour or even exceeds it. It

I have the sshd daemon located at /sbin/ssh_22 in this scenario (because I have more than one daemon with separate executable images). After upgrading from 3.6.1p2 to 3.7p1, with the /sbin/ssh_22 copy replaced by mv (not by writing over the existing image), I do SIGHUP and get this message logged: Sep 16 15:07:36 vega sshd_22[22552]: Received SIGHUP; restarting. Sep 16 15:07:36 vega

[garbage in Chinese snipped] Is there any way to set up a post-confirmation system for non-subscribers so that their posts do not get distributed unless they confirm first? -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- | Phil Howard - KA9WGN | Dallas | http://linuxhomepage.com/ | | phil-nospam at ipal.net | Texas, USA | http://phil.ipal.org/ |

I'm finding even less on rsync and SSL. I would have imagined someone would have done something with this already, but apparently not. So I guess I need to ask and see for sure: has anyone worked on issues of using rsync via SSL, such as with stunnel? I want to have encrypted access, either anonymous or authenticated, but without granting any SSH access to anyone (e.g. the rsync

Is there a configure option to build OpenSSH mostly statically? I want to have openssl libraries statically linked. I'd prefer libc (and related) not be, and libz could go either way. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- | Phil Howard - KA9WGN | Dallas | http://linuxhomepage.com/ | | phil-nospam at ipal.net | Texas, USA | http://phil.ipal.org/ |

Are there any clients and/or servers for Windows (clients only for Win98/ME) which can use the rsync protocol, or especially rsync over SSL (e.g. like stunnel, not ssh), which would allow setting up some well controlled and secure bulk file exchanging between Windows an Unix? SMB is not going to be an option and a VPN may not be an option, either (there are technical reasons for that but they are

I presume the option --copy-unsafe-links really means to copy the file contents a symlink points to, even outside the tree being copyed, rather than make a symlink on the destination. What I find is that if a symlink on the source is dangling, that is, it points to nothing that exists, that symlink is not created at the destination. What I want is for all symlinks to be reproduced as symlinks

Now that I got klibc to build, the next step is to leanr what it takes to compile ... and most importantly, link ... a program with klibc. Past experience with the GNU toolchain tells me GCC will be a bit of a trouble maker in this, probably trying to make inappropriate library references that would work fine with glibc. I do not currently have any intent to make shared/dynamically linked

What risk exists in changing the check for the matching version of openssl so that the final letter part of the version (e.g. 0.9.6c vs. 0.9.6d) is ignored? Are there any security vulnerabilities in such a thing? What if ssh(d) is linked against an older _letter_ version such as 0.9.6c and now finds the library is 0.9.6d? Is there a security risk in that? Surely a major API change would not

Server host config: Slackware 8.0 (custom boot scripts) glibc-2.2.3 gcc-2.95.3 Linux-2.4.18 Client host config: (same as server) Symptom: session disconnects with no message to client: ============================================================================= phil at antares:/home/phil 153> ssh -V OpenSSH_3.1p1, SSH protocols 1.5/2.0, OpenSSL 0x0090603f phil at antares:/home/phil 154>