similar to: Regarding [Bug 1936] lseek failed in map_ptr

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Regarding [Bug 1936] lseek failed in map_ptr"

2004 Oct 15
0
[Bug 1936] New: lseek failed in map_ptr
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1936 Summary: lseek failed in map_ptr Product: rsync Version: 2.6.3 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Windows XP Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: jitbose@yahoo.com QAContact:
2005 Feb 27
1
[Bug 1936] lseek failed in map_ptr
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1936 wayned@samba.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED ------- Additional Comments From wayned@samba.org 2005-02-27 14:14 ------- I've never been able to reproduce this bug. Are
2005 Aug 01
1
smb_lookup error=-13
I am experiencing an odd problem while attempting to mount and access a directory with smbfs. smbclient does not exhibit the same behavior. I have created a directory /mnt/smb-test and am attempting to mount a volume from a NetApp Filer running OnTap 7 with NTFS security mode. An Active Directory DC handles security for the share. The Linux machine shows as registered in AD and I can use
2002 Feb 16
2
map_ptr error
We're using rsync to mirror a web server. The rsync is initiated using ssh from a Red Hat Linux 7.2 box, the files are located on an Alpha running a version of Digital Unix 4. On the Alpha rsync is 2.5.2, The Linux box used to have a 2.4.6-X version, but with the map_ptr problems I built 2.5.2 on that as well. However, version incompatibility was not the problem, as they persist after the
2002 Feb 15
1
unexpected read size of 0 in map_ptr (Solaris 2.5.1)
Hi list, Since upgrading rsync to version 2.5.2 on a Solaris 2.5.1 box, I see plenty of Warning: unexpected read size of 0 in map_ptr when doing my nightly backup (rsyncing some directories to an rsyncd on the same LAN). I have never seen this message before, and I only see it on the Solaris machine (I upgraded all my other machines to 2.5.2 as well). I hope this is not a FAQ... I did not find
2002 Feb 20
8
map_ptr warning
I am trying to finalize the use of rsync for updatiung a new nfs server before we take the old one offline. I keep getting the following warning during the rsync process: Warning: unexpected rad size of 0 in map_ptr Any ideas where this comes from and how to make it go away? I am using rsync 2.5.2 on Solaris 8 to pull data from rsync 2.5.2 on Solaris 7. Bob roconnor@vectorpartners.com
2002 Aug 05
5
[patch] read-devices
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
2002 Feb 06
2
Error from rsync-2.5.2
Hi, I have compiled the new version 2.5.2 rsync in our servers, then ran rsync last night, there were some files not copied to destination server, both source and destination servers are running 2.5.2, I got the following error messages, can you please let me know what would be caused the errors? I copied back 2.3.2 version on both servers, and rsync went well. Thanks for the help, here is
2005 Jul 15
1
Windows File Permissions
Greetings, I just have a couple of questions. One is related to Samba specifically the second deals with Windows Networking, RSYNC, and Linux in general. I have asked it in the RSYNC mailing list, but so far no one has provided any insight. I apologize if anyone has gone over this information. I have been unable to find much help in the mailing list archives, IRC, or the documentation.
2002 Feb 01
0
rsync Warning: unexpected read size of 0 in map_ptr
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 06:03:10PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Dave Dykstra (dwd@bell-labs.com) said: > > I stumbled across the bug report > > http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58878 > > > > which shows that you made a bug fix to rsync on Sunday. What exactly did > > you do? > > Attached. It's the same thing as yours, I just
2009 Jan 15
2
Problem syncing large dataset
Hi, When using rsync-3.0.2 through 3.0.5, I get this error on a large dataset syncing from machine-a to machine-b: $ /bin/rsync -aHSz /local/. machine-b:/local/. invalid len passed to map_ptr: -1737287498 rsync error: error in file IO (code 11) at fileio.c(188) [sender=3.0.5] This happens no matter which side initiates the connection, so this fails in the same way: $ /bin/rsync -aHSz
2009 Apr 26
4
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 6293] New: rsync crashes when transferring files
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6293 Summary: rsync crashes when transferring files Product: rsync Version: 3.0.5 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Mac OS X Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: dirk.samba@miriup.de
2005 Sep 20
2
Nulls instead of data
In short: Platform: linux with 2.4 kernel Version: rsync 2.6.6 Command line: rsync266 -av -W --bwlimit=1 /mnt/somedir/rsync-2.6.6.tar.gz ./ Destination: local disk Source: file on a smbfs mounted filesystem; share is exported on a NT 4.0 workstation over a very slow and unstable link Result: Rsync completes operation with no special message, but the resulting file is damaged, large
2011 May 29
22
[Bug 8177] New: Problems with big sparsed files
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8177 Summary: Problems with big sparsed files Product: rsync Version: 3.0.8 Platform: x64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: joluinfante at gmail.com
2013 Mar 07
2
KVM Raw Format Image Causes lseek Error when Copying
When copying a raw KVM image to my usb drive I got a lseek error...why is this? localhost temp # lr /kvm_guests/newInstall.img? -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10G Oct 22 05:36 /kvm_guests/newInstall.img localhost temp # localhost temp # cp /kvm_guests/newInstall.img . ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? cp: cannot lseek `./newInstall.img': Invalid argument localhost temp # df -h Filesystem ? ? ?Size ?Used Avail
2003 Jun 27
1
bug? -z option and large compressed data
Hi, I think I found a bug in usage of zlib. rsync 2.5.6 with -z fails like bellow. % cp install-disk2.iso /var/tmp/install-disk2.iso install-disk2.iso 100% |*****************************| 316 MB 00:56 % rsync -vIz install-disk2.iso 127.0.0.1:/var/tmp/install-disk2.iso install-disk2.iso deflate on token returned 0 (16384 bytes left) rsync error: error in rsync protocol
2001 Jun 18
2
Client protocol error:(nil): lseek: Illegal seek
now that i have wineX compiling from cvs when i try to run wine i get: Client protocol error:(nil): lseek: Illegal seek even if i try wine --help here is the strace if its anyhelp execve("/usr/bin/wine", ["wine"], [/* 25 vars */]) = 0 uname({sys="Linux", node="fnord-rides-again", ...}) = 0 brk(0) = 0x804c47c mmap(0, 4096,
2020 May 24
3
[PATCH] file_checksum() optimization
When a whole-file checksum is performed, hashing was done in 64 byte blocks, causing overhead and limiting performance. Testing showed the performance improvement to go up quickly going from 64 to 512 bytes, with diminishing returns above, 4096 was where it seemed to plateau for me. Re-used CHUNK_SIZE (32 kB) as it already exists and should be fine to use here anyway. Noticed this because
2013 May 17
2
[Bug 9894] New: Rsync can silently zero out chunks in a file
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9894 Summary: Rsync can silently zero out chunks in a file Product: rsync Version: 3.0.9 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: critical Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: an.m at outlook.com
2004 Aug 02
4
reducing memmoves
Attached is a patch that makes window strides constant when files are walked with a constant block size. In these cases, it completely avoids all memmoves. In my simple local test of rsyncing 57MB of 10 local files, memmoved bytes went from 18MB to zero. I haven't tested this for a big variety of file cases. I think that this will always reduce the memmoves involved with walking a large