similar to: Not preserving permissions really preserves some

They seem to be for me, even when I don't pass in the --perms flag. This is a problem because I'm rsyncing to a samba mount with fixed permissions. Looking at rsync.c (for version 2.5.5) starting at line 204, I see this code snippet: #ifdef HAVE_CHMOD if (!S_ISLNK(st->st_mode)) { if (st->st_mode != file->mode) { updated = 1; if

Hi, Recently, there have been some fundamental achievements regarding acl-support on the cygwin platform. I thought that it would be convenient to offer an acl-patch enabled rsync as a part of the cwrsync package (a yet another minimalist rsync on cygwin solution). I get some compilation errors. What I did: - Downloaded acl patch v1.113 from rsync site - Run commands below In the rsync source

If the rsyncd.conf has a line such as: log file = /var/log/rsync/log and /var/log/rsync doesn't exist or isn't a directory (or the log file can't be opened for any other reason), then there's no warning whatsoever, as rsync forks itself into the background before checking the config, opening the log file, etc. Worse still, it gets a SIGSEGV, and dumps core. Here's a strace

I noticed that rsync sometimes miscalculates the permissions of the top-level destination directory when --perms is off. For example, run these commands in an area free of default ACLs: umask 0000 mkdir -p src/foo chmod 700 src src/foo rsync -r src/ dest/ find . -ls 763054 0 drwx------ 4 matt matt 96 Feb 16 17:57 . 763158 0 drwx------ 3 matt matt 72 Feb 16

The attached patch provides an additional check for the checksumming mode to ensure that a file that is actually written out to disk can be read back and has the same MD4 sum as the file on at the originating location. Regards, Nick. -------------- next part -------------- *** rsync-2.6.6pre1/receiver.c 2005-04-14 02:42:13.000000000 +0100 --- rsync-new/receiver.c 2005-07-26

Hiya, I can see it's a regular subject on this list. I, like others wanted to use rsync to synchronise two block devices (as it happens one lvm volume and one nbd device served by qemu-img on a remote host from a qcow2 disk image so that I can keep the old versions) As I couldn't find any report of it being done successfully, I'm just sharing my findings as it might benefit others.

I have another small feature suggestion, it should not cause such a stir as the whole "file list" issue (I kind of wish I never said anything about it :) ). What about adding a "UMASK" setting to rsync (for use on the command line and/or perhaps rsyncd.conf)? I realize that it may be a problem/conflict with -p, but I think it could be a useful feature. -- Aaron W Morris

Hi, I have written a 'smallish' patch to implement the --inplace option as discussed on this mailing list at various points in the past. It makes a small modification to the sender algorithm so that it won't ask the receiver to relocate blocks from earlier in the file when running with the --inplace option. I would appreciate any testing and feedback people can provide! I

On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 18:50, Alessandro Baggi wrote: > Il 28/10/2016 16:28, Valeri Galtsev ha scritto: >> On Fri, October 28, 2016 2:42 am, Alessandro Baggi wrote: >> > Il 27/10/2016 19:38, Yamaban ha scritto: >> > > For my personal use I would replace that Drive asap. >> > > - There is no warranty for it anymore (time since buy) >> > > -

As those of you who watch CVS will be aware Wayne has been making progress in reducing memory requirements of rsync. Much of what he has done has been the product of discussions between he and myself that started a month ago with John Van Essen. Most recently Wayne has changed how the file_struct and its associated data are allocated, eliminating the string areas. Most of these changes have been

I am having difficulty in try to preserve permissions on Unix files that are copied from the samba server onto a Windows98 system, and then copied again via samba back to an 'upload' directory on the samba server. Specifically, I am sharing "/etc" (samba read only) for backup purposes, and while logged in as "root" on the windows system, I can drag and drop these files

http://www.lsi.com/channel/about_channel/whatsnew/warpdrive_slp300/index.html Good stuff for ZFS. Fred -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/attachments/20101117/d48186f0/attachment.html>

Hello, It would be goog if attached patch will be included in upstream. This patch adds option --apt-support for rsync and with this option rsync will print some additiona information about file being transfered. No program logic changed. Having this option in rsync we can have apt with rsync method support. Begin forwarded message: Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 11:34:14 -0200 From: Gustavo Niemeyer

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3549 Summary: rsync applies umask to some directories even when a default ACL takes effect Product: rsync Version: 2.6.7 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo:

Hi all, is anyone on this list who dares/dared to store his index files on a MLC-SSD? Regards, Patrick

I just replaced my drives for Dovecot using Maildir format with a pair of Solid State Drives (SSD) in a raid 0 configuration. It's really really fast. Kind of expensive but it's like getting 20x the speed for 20x the price. I think the big gain is in the 0 seek time. Here's what I bought. Crucial RealSSD C300 CTFDDAC256MAG-1G1 2.5" 256GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State

Hi -- I was very keen to download rsync and give it a whirl with the new --link-dest feature. However, I was terribly puzzled when I couldn't seem to get it working, even though --compare-dest with the same argument would work. It seemed like new files would be transferred even though files existed in the compare-dest/link-dest location; compare-dest would detect them but link-dest would

Hi, I don''t know if it''s already been discussed here, but while thinking about using the OCZ Vertex 2 Pro SSD (which according to spec page has supercaps built in) as a shared slog and L2ARC device it stroke me that this might not be a such a good idea. Because this SSD is MLC based, write cycles are an issue here, though I can''t find any number in their spec. Why do I

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3649 Summary: buffer overflow in receive_file_entry Product: rsync Version: 2.6.0 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: sambesselink@planet.nl

Are any of you using the Intel 320 as ZIL? It''s MLC based, but I understand its wear and performance characteristics can be bumped up significantly by increasing the overprovisioning to 20% (dropping usable capacity to 80%). Anyone have experience with this? Ray