similar to: Patch to handle ACL differences

I noticed that rsync itemizes "p" whenever it copies a new file and finds an alternate basis file whose permissions differ from those to be applied to the destination file, even when --perms and --executability are both off. To see this, run the following in an empty directory: mkdir src dest basis touch src/file basis/file chmod 600 src/file chmod 644 basis/file rsync -r -ii

I noticed that rsync is happy to hard-link a device node from a --link-dest dir even if its mtime differs from that of the source device node and --times is given. Is this behavior expected? It seems to break the rule that a difference in preserved attributes disqualifies a hard link. To see the behavior, run the following as root: mkdir src dest basis mknod src/null c 1 3 sleep 1 mknod

I've been using a 2.6.2 that I modified myself to get ACLs as I like. I'm trying now to get back into the public version of rsync, but am finding difficulties. This one seems pretty basic. It's on a CentOS 4.5 machine with rsync rpm rsync-3.0.4-1.el4.rf and kernel 2.6.9-55.0.2.plus.c4. After the operation, f1 and f2 should have identical ACLs. They don't. [root@house0

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5644 Summary: Option to recheck basis dirs for existing dest files Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy:

On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 02:19:23 +0000, Andrew Gideon wrote: > Look at tools like inotifywait, auditd, or kfsmd to see what's easily > available to you and what best fits your needs. > > [Though I'd also be surprised if nobody has fed audit information into > rsync before; your need doesn't seem all that unusual given ever-growing > disk storage.] I wanted to take this

I currently do incremental backups using --link-dest. Unchanged files are hard links to the previous snapshot; changed files are new copies. Where this "fails" is for large files that have received small changes. The directory containing my main IMAP account, for example, typically generates between 1 and 2 G of daily backup data as I file messages in my inbox. Yesterday, though,

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7618 Summary: symlinks and --link-dest Product: rsync Version: 3.0.7 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: the_majkl at seznam.cz QAContact:

On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 08:59:25 +0200, Paul Slootman wrote: > btrfs has support for this: you make a backup, then create a btrfs > snapshot of the filesystem (or directory), then the next time you make a > new backup with rsync, use --inplace so that just changed parts of the > file are written to the same blocks and btrfs will take care of the > copy-on-write part. That's

I've found an error: ACLs are not properly preserved when a file is moved from Solaris to a 2.6 Linux (I'm testing using CentOS 4 update 3 plus updates). This is using 2.6.8 built with the acl patch on both platforms. The file on the source Solaris machine: [truffle:/opt]# getfacl /xxx/x # file: /xxx/x # owner: root # group: other user::rw- user:httpd:r-x #effective:r--

Hello, I am trying to use ACL and link-dest without success. Here is what I do. First step, without ACL : rsync -ai --link-dest=<date_folder_1> --link-dest=<date_folder_2> /sourcedir myserver::backup/$(date)/ All works fine there, my files are hard linked together, "ls -li" on myserver confirms. Second step, adding ACL : rsync -aiA --link-dest=<date_folder_1>

I'm trying to understand the point of the --checksum-seed option. As I understand it from a little reading, checksums are not cached over executions of rsync. So...what is the point of fixing the seed? Is this in support of patches which *do* support caching of checksums? I've read about caching these in files and in xaddr. Is there a "best solution" for caching

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12036 Bug ID: 12036 Summary: Multiple --link-dest, --copy-dest, or --compare-dest flags produce incorrect behavior Product: rsync Version: 3.1.2 Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component:

Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- diff -urN rsync-3.0.2-orig/generator.c rsync-3.0.2/generator.c --- rsync-3.0.2-orig/generator.c 2008-03-28 10:30:11.000000000 -0700 +++ rsync-3.0.2/generator.c 2008-05-07 15:35:08.317364774 -0700 @@ -1508,6 +1508,7 @@ if (preserve_links && S_ISLNK(file->mode)) { #ifdef SUPPORT_LINKS + int iflags =

Paul Wayne, Kevin, Teodor and others, Thanks for your contributions in response to my postings. Paul: I was very imprecise if not plain wrong in my description. :-( Thanks for explaining what really happens. > "Rsync will not update an existing file in-place unless you use the > --inplace option. So --whole-file is irrelevant for this. > Rsync (without --inplace) will always

On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 15:40:51 +0100, Simon Hobson wrote: > The think here is that you are into "backup" tools rather than the > general purpose tool that rsync is intended to be. Yes, that is true. Rsync serves so well as a core component to backup, I can be blind about "something other than rsync". I'll look at the tools you suggest. However, you've made be

Hello everyone, this is my first email and I hope I do not say stupid things:) I'm trying to synchronize two folders on two different servers via a satellite link (rsync can be useful for its properties) only that I have a problem, some files are updated on the source, but rsync transfers the entire file on the target, not the differences. This is' the configuration: - Source: rsync

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3988 Summary: -a collides with --flags Product: rsync Version: 2.6.8 Platform: x86 OS/Version: FreeBSD Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: rsync@oldach.net QAContact:

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3829 Summary: rsync loses access ACLs on transferred files Product: rsync Version: 2.6.9 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy: hashproduct+rsync@gmail.com

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4079 Summary: rsync fails with --inplace, --link-dest and --no-whole- file Product: rsync Version: 2.6.8 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org

Andrew Gideon <c182driver1 at gideon.org> wrote: > These both bring me to the idea of using some file system auditing > mechanism to drive - perhaps with an --include-from or --files-from - > what rsync moves. > > Where I get stuck is that I cannot envision how I can provide rsync with > a limited list of files to move that doesn't deny the benefit of --link- >