similar to: Differentiating debug messages from both sides

As mentioned on the rsync home page, the --files-from=FILE option in rsync version 2.6.0 is a useful option that allows one to "specify a list of files to transfer, and can be much more efficient than a recursive descent using include/exclude statements (if you know in advance what files you want to transfer)". However, --files-from does not help one implement the --rsync-exclude=FILE

This is a patch to add an --rsync-exclude option to rsync-2.5.6cvs. File names in .rsync- (or .rsync+) are excluded (or included) from the file lists associated with the current directory and all of its subdirectories. This has advantages over --cvs-exclude for backing up large file systems since the .cvsignore files only apply to the current directory: unless the .cvsignore restrictions apply

I have added regular expression support using a POSIX implementation. The patch (against 2.5.5) is attached. The implementation is simple and follows the same mechanism that is implemented for normal searches. I added these command line arguments: --rexclude=PATTERN exclude files matching regexp PATTERN --rexclude-from=FILE exclude regexp patterns listed in FILE --rinclude=PATTERN

Hi guys, I recently stumbled across what I think is an rsync bug. The problem was I was trying to rsync from one CVS checkout, to another, and was using rsync -Cavz to do the job. In this CVS module, there happens to be two sub-directories with the names of "core" and "tags" respectively, which were ignored, since these names matched the default CVS ignore list. When rsync

> Just curious: what about the rsync+ patch? Thanks for the reminder. I've just committed Jos's rsync+ patch onto the "branch_mbp_rsyncplus_merge" branch. If it works OK and nobody screams I will move it across onto the main tree tomorrow or Wednesday. I see the patch doesn't add documentation about the new options to the man page, so we should fix that in the future.

> I like the idea of your rsync-exclude.patch and have thought > about hacking it in myself. However as you already have done the work > may I make a small suggestion...... can the name of the exclude file > (your .rsync) be specified in the flags.... e.g. > > rsync --rsync-exclude=.snapshot -axvH /here /there > > In this way different invocations (e.g. system and

Wayne, It's taken a little while for me to get more familiar with the code, but I think I've reached a good breakpoint in improving batch-mode. Let me highlight some of the changes in the attached patch: * --write-batch and --read-batch arguments are no longer passed from client to server. This fixes the current problem that causes the server threads to die when the client

This patch adds the --link-by-hash=DIR option, which hard links received files in a link farm arranged by MD4 file hash. The result is that the system will only store one copy of the unique contents of each file, regardless of the file's name. (rev 3) * Don't link empty files. * Roll over to new file when filesystem maximum link count is reached. * If link fails for another reason, leave

Greetings, I'd like to propose a new option to rsync, which causes it to read device files as if they were regular files. This includes pipes, character devices and block devices (I'm not sure about sockets). The main motivation is cases where you need to synchronize a large amount of data that is not available as regular files, as in the following scenarios: * Keep a copy of a block

Hi! I am doing backups from a number of machines to an rsync server. For some time I was trying to come up with a solution, which would prevent users from peeking at each other's files, which are backed up. Finally, I've hacked rsync, introducing a new option "write only" for rsyncd.conf. When set to true, this option forbids the transfers from server to the client, thus solving

Wayne, Please consider the attached patch. This applies to the current CVS, and is independant of patches/local-batch.diff. As a matter of fact, I'm sure it would conflict heavily with local-batch.diff. This version of batch mode has a couple distinguishing features: Write-batch records (almost) the entire sender side of the conversation into one file. ("Almost" because it has

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.

Hi, I'm having a problem rsyncing one file (since I signed it). It seems that the content of a file is able to cause problems in the protocol. building file list ... 28820 files to consider apt/packages/avifile/ apt/packages/avifile/avifile-0.7.34-1.dag.rh90.i386.rpm rsync: error writing 4 unbuffered bytes - exiting: Broken pipe rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code

This patch adds the --link-by-hash=DIR option, which hard links received files in a link farm arranged by MD4 file hash. The result is that the system will only store one copy of the unique contents of each file, regardless of the file's name. (rev 2) * This revision is actually against CVS HEAD (I didn't realize I was working from a stale rsync'd CVS). * Apply permissions after

Yes, it's time once again to return to the subject of moving files. With the recent changes to the communications code between the receiver and the generator, there is now a non-clogging channel that we can use to signal the sender when a file has been successfully transferred, which allows us delete the original for all transferred files. I have in the past waffled on whether this feature

I have some rsync defined as a server on one of my production systems and use to to sync out various configuration files for services running on the box (dhcpd, dns named.conf files & the like). Both ends are Compaq Alpha/Tru64 5.1 systems running rsync 2.5.5. I'm having a fit trying to include certain files in specific subdirectories under the main path; one such example is below:

I just received this bug report on Debian's rsync package. I've verified it. The entry from the manpage: -C [...] Finally, any file is ignored if it is in the same directory as a .cvsignore file and matches one of the patterns listed therein. Here the patterns of a .cvsignore file is apparently used to exclude file outside the directory where the .cvsignore file is found. Any

I'm using a simple client/server backup pull model rsync -a --delete -e ssh --exclude-from=$exclude path/$client.exclude \ ${client}-rsync:/ $path/$client but can't seem to find the right 'exclude' combination to fetch certain directories but not their contents. Unfortunately this was found during a recent major restore where the excluded directories had to be manually

smbclient (and smbtar) in version 2.2.7a (and prior) has problems with large files (> 4GB). The following patch (against 2.2.7a) fixes all known problems with this. This code has been checked into the CVS tree in all branches as well. -- ====================================================================== Herb Lewis Silicon Graphics Networking Engineer

Hello, I have written a little script that's would email me all errors. rsync -vah --delete --stats <sources> <destination> > /var/log/sauvegarde/listoffile.log 2> /var/log/sauvegarde/errors.log My problem is i want to have the stats in my mail. Is it possible to redirect --stats to STDERR. I have tryed to do this : /---