similar to: 2.6.4 Potential protocol-corrupting bug

Hi all, I'm running rsync version 2.6.3 protocol version 28 on Solaris 8 and am having a problem. We have some scripts that wrap around rsync and generate a list of files to transfer from the sending system (regardless of whether that directory exists on the receiver). I was expecting rsync to fail when transferring files with a path that doesn't exist on the receiver (in fact

Sorry, aber 2.6.4 ist ZIEMLICH GEIL. Da m?ssen wir mal die neuen schalterchen ausprobieren. (delete-after zum Beispiel) Ich lass Dich raus aus so was. Gruss Markus -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: rsync-announce-bounces+ulrichd=voelcker.com@lists.samba.org [mailto:rsync-announce-bounces+ulrichd=voelcker.com@lists.samba.org] Im Auftrag von rsync-announce@lists.samba.org Gesendet:

I installed the newly released version of cwRsync today on a few Windows machines and have noticed a new problem that I have not seen mentioned anywhere. When syncing to an NT machine used for backups, my rsync client exited at the end of the transfer with the following message to standard error: multiplexing overflow 1:296 [sender] rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12)

I am wondering if there are known incompatibilities between 2.6.3 and 2.6.4? I have a debian box with 2.6.4 and a FC3 box with 2.6.3. Most of the time rsync works fine between the two but I am running this command on FC3 box: rsync -azvv --stats --delete --files-from=/root/.rsb2.tmp / nathan@debian:/home/backup/bkp.01 And I am getting this error message: building file list ... [sender] expand

I've released rsync 2.6.4pre4. I believe that this version will be what gets released as 2.6.4, hopefully on Wednesday. Please try this out and let me know if anything is amiss. All the changes since 2.6.3 are mentioned here: http://rsync.samba.org/ftp/rsync/preview/NEWS You'll also find a preview of the man pages in the same dir (as usual):

I've released rsync 2.6.4pre4. I believe that this version will be what gets released as 2.6.4, hopefully on Wednesday. Please try this out and let me know if anything is amiss. All the changes since 2.6.3 are mentioned here: http://rsync.samba.org/ftp/rsync/preview/NEWS You'll also find a preview of the man pages in the same dir (as usual):

I'm trying to use a Nas4Free storage system. This same hardware worked fine on Freenas 0.7.2. O/S: Nas4Free 9.0.0.1.148 which comes with nut 2.6.4. UPS is an APC Back UPS RS 800. USB interface. Driver : usbhid-ups Port: auto my NAS is communicating with the UPS, but in testing power failures, I'm not getting the shutdown to be handled properly. When I pull the AC plug on the UPS,

What the maximum filesize rsync can transfer? I'm trying to rsync one of my servers to another but the rsync is croaking on a file that's barely 1GB. Tips, hints, suggestions? rsync server is AIX 4.3.3 ML11 - rsync 2.6.3 rsync client is AIX 5.3 ML1 - rsync 2.6.4 Thanks -Jeff -- Jeff Schoby Unix/Network Admin City of Columbia, Missouri 573.874.6320

On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 07:16:19PM +0300, ????? ??????? wrote: >/ multiplexing overflow 101:7104843 [receiver] / This indicates that the protocol got corrupted somehow because that is saying that the receiver got a MSG_DELETED message with a 7104843-byte buffer attached (which rsync is telling you is too big), but you're not even deleting files. What version of rsync are you using? == ==

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2583 Summary: rsync fails with "authentication failure" Product: rsync Version: 2.6.4 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: hpa@zytor.com

On 10/08/2012 21:58, nut-upsuser-request at lists.alioth.debian.org wrote: >>> Arnaud Quette<aquette.dev<at> gmail.com> writes: >>>> 2012/6/3 Chris Rees<crees<at> freebsd.org>: >>>>> Hi all, >>>> Hi Chris, >>>> >>>>> After some research I've found that this device should run with the

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=989 Summary: openssh-3.9p1 on Solaris 8 - multiplex.sh NOK Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 3.9p1 Platform: UltraSparc OS/Version: Solaris Status: NEW Keywords: patch, help-wanted Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: Build system

I believe I have encountered a nasty bug with rsync 2.6.6 "--delete-excluded" option. When this is enabled, rsync''s operation appears to break entirely. I have a script that I''ve been using for a few years. The script hasn''t changed in the last year or so. Recently I upgraded from SuSE 9.3 to SUSE 10.0 which means that I went from rsync 2.6.3 (+ patches,

I have released rsync 2.6.4. This version has quite a few enhancements over 2.6.3, some optimizations in the delete handling, and the usual collection of bug fixes. I'd like to say "thanks" to everyone who downloaded and tested one of the pre-release versions -- the feedback was very helpful! A summary of the changes since 2.6.3 is available here:

I have released rsync 2.6.4. This version has quite a few enhancements over 2.6.3, some optimizations in the delete handling, and the usual collection of bug fixes. I'd like to say "thanks" to everyone who downloaded and tested one of the pre-release versions -- the feedback was very helpful! A summary of the changes since 2.6.3 is available here:

When I was working on the the hard-link change, I noticed that many of the hard-link verbose messages were getting lost. These messages get output very near the end of the transfer, and it turns out that the reason for the loss was that there are two pipes flowing from the generator and the receiver, and it was possible for the "we're all done" message to get received down the redo

--- PROTOCOL.mux | 24 ++++++++++++------------ mux.c | 10 +++++----- 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) diff --git a/PROTOCOL.mux b/PROTOCOL.mux index 1d8c463..958e0d5 100644 --- a/PROTOCOL.mux +++ b/PROTOCOL.mux @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ defined. To open a new multiplexed session, a client may send the following request: - uint32 MUX_C_MSG_NEW_SESSION + uint32

Hi John, I'm forwarding this email to the relevant developer lists at Xiph.Org, where the format was created and where the experts gather. I'm certain there is a design reason for putting the bos pages of all logical bitstreams together at the start. My guess is that with digital media you usually have a delay time for setting up the decoders for a specific format and by clustering

Hi John, I'm forwarding this email to the relevant developer lists at Xiph.Org, where the format was created and where the experts gather. I'm certain there is a design reason for putting the bos pages of all logical bitstreams together at the start. My guess is that with digital media you usually have a delay time for setting up the decoders for a specific format and by clustering

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2628 wayned@samba.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|hangs indefinitely (while |hangs indefinitely at start |listing files) |of phase 1 ------- Additional Comments From wayned@samba.org