similar to: RSYNC protocol

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "RSYNC protocol"

2006 Aug 27
0
Protocol
I am looking for someone who knows the rsync protocol byte specifics, so I can write the documentation for the file list and file data transfer parts of the protocol. I have already written a simple explanation of the protocol handshake, and I would really like for the end result to be place with the code or on the website. I have attached what I have written so far, a rough draft of what I
2005 Jun 19
1
rsync version 2.6.3 protocol version 28 - hosts allow dows not work
Hello all. Rsync rocks, however I am having problems with two things: 1. The hosts allow directive does not allow the use of a hostname. (DNS is working for I can do a NSLOOKUP on the hostname and it resolves). If I put the IP address it works fine, problem is that we run DHCP at the office and my lease expires every 4 days. 2. Rsync is not logging to /var/log/rsyncd.log. The following is my
2020 Jan 09
0
Relicensing Xapian
This is an update on the current status of the relicensing, but also an opportunity to give feedback. Sorry it's rather long, but I think it's necessary to summarise the situation - there are probably list members who weren't even born at the start of the history of this! Xapian is currently licensed as GPLv2+, but isn't something we actually chose for Xapian, but rather due to a
2009 Apr 27
1
[Code study]should we remove if (motd && *motd) section?
Dear List, I'm confused when we will run into "if (motd && *motd)"? As I have found that Globals is set 0 during initialization, and I didn't find anywhere else assign the value. If so, should we remove this section? Or there might be some where I missed? Please correct me, if I'm wrong. Thanks in advance. clientserver.c #line 147~160 > if (!am_client) {
2016 Jan 24
0
LGPL relicense port of rsync
> > > > > > > I guess I could write an initial protocol specification - but it would > > > not be complete and I wouldn't be able to relicense my library to > > > LGPL anyway. > > > > > > So I guess I have convinced myself that it is not worth the effort > > > trying. Time is probably better spent coding ;) And that's OK
2011 Nov 29
2
template does not print variables
Hello list, I am having a problem with template file. Why are variables not interpolated? [root@puppet manifests]# cat /etc/motd memory free = <%= memoryfree %> domain = <%= domain %> operating system = <%= operatingsystem %> This is the template file [root@puppet manifests]# cat ../templates/motd.erb memory free = <%= memoryfree %> domain = <% domain %>
2009 Feb 20
1
Getting "poll: protocol failure in circuit setup" from rsh
Hi all, I inherited a cpu-stats script from the previous *nixadmin at our department. This script relies on a rsh-command to get the vmstats from the remote machines and then using a perl script to push it to a web server. Now I''ve just added a new machine running CentOS 5.2 x64 to the script and I get the error message in the subject line; "poll: protocol failure in circuit
2009 Apr 22
2
[Code study] lp_motd_file defination? Help
Dear List, Currently, I read this in clientserver.c, line 148. motd = lp_motd_file(); I have googled, but didn't the definition of char *lp_motd_file(void). Can anyone help to explain the following code segment. Many thanks. #line 147 ~ 160, in clientserver.c, version 3.0.5 > if (!am_client) { > motd = lp_motd_file(); > if (motd && *motd) { > FILE *f =
2017 Aug 10
5
Relicensing: Revised Developer Policy
On Aug 10, 2017, at 3:08 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Chris Lattner <clattner at llvm.org> writes: > >>> On Aug 10, 2017, at 2:59 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I can find old threads about it, but nothing saying why it was decided >>> that
2016 Jan 08
0
LGPL relicense port of rsync
Am 07.01.2016 um 23:26 schrieb Per Lundqvist: > Hi, > > I am maintaining a port of rsync (https://github.com/perlundq/yajsync) > which is GPL:ed of course. The main purpose of the project is to > provide a Java API library for the rsync protocol. It would > therefore be really nice to be able to use LGPL as the license. > > But in order to do so I would first have to get a
2011 Apr 01
9
Puppet on Redhat 6
Hello I have been using puppet for a while now, more or less successfully on SLES 11 and CentOS 5.5 currently I am using puppet 2.6.6 I now am trying it out on redhat 6, and now i run into an problem with even the simplest of modules/classes The error I get is : debug: /Stage[main]/Motd/File[/etc/motd]/content: Executing ''diff -u / etc/motd
2016 Jan 24
2
LGPL relicense port of rsync
Hi Andrey, 2016-01-23 4:02 GMT+01:00 Andrey Gursky <andrey.gursky at e-mail.ua>: ... > If they don't want to bother with just discussing, why would they take a > big effort to claim? And your proposition for LGPL is not very > different in opposite to BSD or public domain. Yes, I agree. The risk of having a future lawsuit against my project would be pretty small if I
2004 Mar 13
1
suppressing motd without decreasing verbosity
Is there a way to make the rsync client suppress the motd without suppressing other messages when connecting to an rsync server? What I want is to run rsync from cron and have it produce output only when any files have been downloaded or deleted and whenever errors have happened. Otherwise, I want it to be quiet. This doesn't seem to be possible with rsync as of version 2.5.7. When I use the
2016 Jan 23
0
LGPL relicense port of rsync
Hi, from my point of view: On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 14:48:09 +0100 Per Lundqvist <perlundq at gmail.com> wrote: > ... > > Getting the approval for a relicensing I think the contributions to > > rsync have to be analyzed in detail to approach a reasonable number of > > contributors. > > > > I experienced that finding a responsible person that is willing to >
2015 Oct 21
2
RFC: Improving license & patent issues in the LLVM community
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:16 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 09:54:30PM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote: >> On Oct 19, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: >> >>>> 2) We could require new contributors to sign the Apache CLA. >> >>> >>
2020 Nov 10
1
Recommended Protocols?
On 10/11/20 1:52 pm, Nikolai Lusan wrote: > Greetings, > > On Mon, 2020-11-09 at 23:42 -0600, Raymond Herrera wrote: > > For several years I have been running the following in a Linux > > server. > > > Dovecot Version: 2.0.9 > > > *IMAP:* > > Connection Security: SSL/TLS > > Port: 993 > > Authentication Method: Normal Password > >
2010 Jun 28
4
Error 400 : could not find template
Hello, I did make a stupid fault: not commiting changes to version control :-( After the installation of puppet-dashboard, I added a recipe to add report = true to puppet config files on clients. Now all Puppet clients don''t update because of an error... What can be the various reasons for an ''400'' error?? I guess it has something to do with rights. Jun 28 09:52:36 pm
2016 Apr 21
5
[Bug 11866] New: rsync fails (failed to re-stat) when using double fuzzy + link-dest on renamed files
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11866 Bug ID: 11866 Summary: rsync fails (failed to re-stat) when using double fuzzy + link-dest on renamed files Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component:
2015 Oct 21
3
RFC: Improving license & patent issues in the LLVM community
On Oct 19, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: >>>> 2) We could require new contributors to sign the Apache CLA. >>> >>> To me, this is the most acceptable option of the listed terms. >> >> Please explain: why? > > First part for me is that switching the code to a different license > doesn't
2017 Sep 13
2
[RFC] Polly Status and Integration
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > > On 09/13/2017 02:16 AM, C Bergström wrote: > > A completely non-technical point, but what's the current "polly" license? > Does integrating that code conflict in any way with the work being done to > relicense llvm? > > > Good question. I discussed this explicitly with