similar to: Latest --files-from patch

I've worked up a new release of my --files-from patch. It has the following changes from the last release: New Changes: ============ - The -R option is now on by default when --files-from has been specified. The user can specify --no-relative to turn this off. - The -a (--archive) option does not imply -r when --files-from was specified. The user can still specify it manually,

I'd like to revisit the topic of moving files from system to system using rsync. I've just updated my patch from its 2.5.0 version to 2.5.1, and I'm curious what people think about getting it integrated into rsync. The patch comes in two parts. The first eliminates a potential hang condition that can happen if the data channel from the receiver to the generator gets clogged up.

For anyone who'd like to check out the latest release of my "rzync" [sic] test release, I've just released a new version. For those that might not have time to look at the code but could provide some feedback based on a rough description, I've created the following simple web page: http://www.clari.net/~wayne/new-protocol.html Here's the tar file of the new

For the small number of people who are checking this out, I released version 0.05 a couple days ago (and only mentioned it on my new-protocol web page) followed today by 0.06. Some highlights of the two releases: - We handle symlinks now in our recursive synchronization mode. - Directory scanning is no longer limited to one active directory at a time (which was sorely needed when all the

Hello All: I've having repeatable problems copying files between linux machines using rsync-2.5.1 and various recent flavors of openssh. The symptom when testing with a single 2M file is that rsync hangs when when the file is 97% transferred. It seems from looking at various archives that this problem may be non-trivial. I tried applying the patch at

I've been having a lot of fun improving my new-protocol testing app. It's seems to be in pretty good shape (for test code), so I figured I'd announce another release for those brave souls that may want to help me in my thinking about a (potential) new rsync protocol. It's a tar.gz file this time because I broke up the code into multiple files. I named it "rzync" just

Didn''t have quite enough space to describe it there...basically i''m having a problem with the :uniq option in my tags. I''m using acts_as_taggable_on_steroid which adds these associations to my Resource class: Resource has_many :taggings, :as => :taggable, :dependent => :destroy, :include => :tag has_many :tags, :through => :taggings, :uniq => true

In a few weeks, no SIP call is going to terminate unless they are signed properly, as mandated by law. We are in the business of Stir-Shaken, signing calls, as an FCC-approved provider. A big differentiator between our service and the rest: we are the only ones who don't need to receive the calls in our servers to sign them. We do this over a MySQL call, easily connectable to Asterisk via

I am looking for a decent provider of SIP Trunks but it has to pass the Stir Shaken token to the next carrier. Does anybody know about any? Sipstation from Sangoma, does not support Stir Shaken. ( Case #01466843 / 0013000000G8PLG / MAIN / Open [ ref:_00D306mPe._5004U1BlBLF:ref ]) Although it's mandatory, somehow they think it's ok. Go figure. -------------- next part -------------- An

I have a few clients who prepare some reports and put it in their outgoing/ directory for me to pick up every morning. Is there a way to delete those files from their outgoing/ after I fetch them ? Thanks Nishi

I need to point out the this is factually misleading and materially false: "I think this, being the basis of your whole argument, is the fallacy. S/S is forcing people to take responsibility, for sure, but carriers won't just let their customers leave because they don't want to sign calls. It will force them to make sure they know who their customers are, and make it impossible for

> > There is a big confusion here about Stir Shaken. It is NOT a provider > issue. Un fact, all providers are whasing their hands and modifying their > swihtches to pass-through the Signature. They cannot sign the call because > then the become the responsible party for the call before the FCC, and > liable for any illegal call. Every owner of a PBX that sends calls to the >

Check out Twilio From: asterisk-users [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Federico Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 11:49 PM To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion' <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com> Subject: [asterisk-users] Question about Sip Trunks who support Stir Shaken I am looking for a decent provider of SIP

Telnyx, 382com, voicetel and as others mentioned BandWidth. I have contacts at 382 and voicetel if you want an intro. On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 11:50 PM Federico <federico at digitalipvoice.com> wrote: > I am looking for a decent provider of SIP Trunks but it has to pass the > Stir Shaken token to the next carrier. Does anybody know about any? > Sipstation from Sangoma, does not

https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/STIR+and+SHAKEN The Wiki above is misleading in what Stir-Shaken means and how it works. End users cannot get a certificate, they cannot self-certify their calls. Somebody completely misunderstood the model. I am afraid the moment will come and thousands of Asterisk operators will be unable to terminate calls. To start with, the model is a hierarchical

WORLDWIDE EMERGENCY The code below needs to be executed before any SIP or PJSIP call destined to the US network, or soon no call will terminate. This is called Stir-Shaken, a new law from the FCC. If this is not working the whole Asterisk industry will crash, vanish, be gone. I am assuming that the caller ID and the Destination Number are in the variables "${CALLERID(num):-10}"

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 15:44:12 -0400, Matthew Fredrickson wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 2:34 PM Saint Michael <venefax at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> There is a big confusion here about Stir Shaken. It is NOT a provider issue. Un fact, all providers are whasing their hands and modifying their swihtches to pass-through the Signature. They cannot sign the call

Hi I have two models . Dbase -------- name vendor type port defuser - default user name Users ------- username password email I need to build an association between these two in that the dbase model''s defuser needs to be present in the users table. I am from a relational database background so am trying hard to understand rails associations. What should I do to associate the

How can I use the --password-file switch with rsync in order not to be promted for the users password so I can run rsync in a cronjob? rsync -uavrpog -e ssh /www root@domain.tld:/DESTINATION/`date +%A` --password-file=/quellen/RSYNC_PASSWD does not work! I always get a prompt to enter users root password! -- Jochen Kaechelin

Hi All, I am experiencing issues with the use of DBase files on a Samba 2.0.5a share, that appear to be due to locking problems. Basically, I have test programs for both DOS and Win32 that does nothing but append records to a DBase database (DBF/MDX files). If more than one client PC is appending to this file, data loss occurs. I get random data loss, with records lost, and index file