similar to: accurate progress for UI

Somebody knows if it's possible to compile rsync (version 3 would be great, but can be 2.6.x) under Mac OS X 10.3.9 with extended attributes? Under OS 10.3.9 the Apple shipped rsync have not yet the -E argument option. RsyncX have a double free bug that is annoying. "Q" rsync 2.6.6 with extended attributes binary only works on 10.4 and above. I have tried to compile rsync

Hi All, Well, we compiled pre9 on an intel Mac running Tiger and now it does work on the machine. I need to see if that will now work on a PPC mac though. Hopefully it will but I am wondering if there is a way to compile and make a universal binary rsync for the Mac that will run on both, from my PPC Mac. Itried that yesterday with patch -p1 <patches/flags.diff patch -p1

Hi Stefanus, Thanks for verifying this. Could you patch this or should I open a new bug report and find a generic solution first? Cheers, Nicolas From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Stefanus Du Toit Sent: woensdag 1 april 2009 18:59 To: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Shuffle combine On 1-Apr-09, at 12:42

Hi All, I think I am missing something with the backup-dir-dels.diff patch. How does that differ from the original --backup -backup-dir=DIR option? Using the original one works fine (on patched or non-patched rsync), putting deleted source files into the DIR on destination, but when I run --backup -backup-dir-dels=DIR, nothing happens to the deleted files. Rob D

Hello, We've run across the following missed optimization: in the attached loop (addind.c/addind-opt.ll) there's a lookup into an array (V) using an indirect index (coming from another array, WI[k]) offset by a loop- invariant base (l). The full addressing expression can be reassociated so that we add the offset l to V's base first, and then add the indirect part. This makes

We currently do backup using rsync amongst Linux and Solaris machines. Modulo an ACL issue that we had to patch, this is working extremely well. But I want to add our OSX machines to the mix. This is, unfortunately, leaving me confused about rsyncx. I can do the normal thing from OSX using rsync. But the page for rsyncx says - cryptically, in my ignorant opinion - that rsyncx adds support for

Thanks Wayne and everybody, This is a huge boost to have a modern rsync for OSX. We're all grateful. Rob D PS I did notice that we lost the bsd flags test in 3.0. It was ok in pre10.... thanks again bbouncer Verifying: basic-permissions ... ok Verifying: timestamps ... Sub-test: modification time ... ok ok Verifying: symlinks ... ok Verifying:

Hi Stefanus, Thanks for the info. I still think it's a bug though. Take for example a case where the vectors each have four elements. The values in Mask[] can range from 0 to 7, while HLSMask only has 4 elements. So LHSMask[Mask[i]] can go out of bounds, no? Cheers, Nicolas From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Stefanus Du

On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Stefanus Du Toit <stefanus.dutoit at rapidmind.com> wrote: > The computation of %base then becomes loop-invariant and can be lifted out. > > What's the best way to add this optimization to LLVM? Probably the best place is LICM itself... only loop transformations are aware whether something is loop-invariant. Although, I'm not completely

The llvm-dev archives (and other llvm/clang mailing list archives) on the web don't seem to have any new messages since some time Monday night. Stefanus -- Stefanus Du Toit <stefanus.dutoit at rapidmind.com> RapidMind Inc. phone: +1 519 885 5455 x116 -- fax: +1 519 885 1463

I am attempting to backup the Users directory on my desktop running OS X 10.3.6. I am backing up to Jaguar Server 10.2.8. I am using RsyncX version 2.1 on both systems. RsyncX Server is set up to run on both systems however in this instance the Rsync client is my desktop and server is Panther Server. When I kick off an RsyncX session, RsyncX will run for a while, then stop part of the way

Hi All, I have been getting reports from users of backuplist+, my wrapper application for rsync (currently with build of 3.0.6), about odd behavior after updating to OS 10.6 Snow Leopard. Basically: the problem occurs backing up a directory to a local mounted network volume. Previously all worked fine but after updating to 10.6 there are reports that no files get copied and the destination fills

Hi Nicolas, On 2-Apr-09, at 6:04 PM, Nicolas Capens wrote: > Thanks for verifying this. Could you patch this or should I open a > new bug report and find a generic solution first? I don't have write access so the best I could do would be to submit a patch, and I'm crazy busy at the moment. I actually think the check I described below is fine and would fix this bug (but

For those curious about uses of LLVM, we just officially announced our adoption of LLVM in our products: http://www.rapidmind.com/News-Nov10-08-LLVM-OpenCL.php Thanks for all the support so far on here, we look forward to continuing to work with LLVM! -- Stefanus Du Toit <stefanus.dutoit at rapidmind.com> RapidMind Inc. phone: +1 519 885 5455 x116 -- fax: +1 519 885 1463

hi will the official rsync version in future maybe support HFS(+) filesystem, like rsyncx does right now? i ask because the rsyncx version dosen't run on my linuxbox and the feature is only supported if all systems use rsyncx. regards sam

On 1 Jun 2004, John Summerfield <john@Corridors.wa.edu.au> wrote: > The jitterbug link on http://rsync.samba.org/nobugs.html no longer works. I > suggest it either be fixed or removed. Thanks, fixed. > You make bug-reporting needlessly difficult, I think. I dislike the need to > subscribe to a mailing-list and potentially receive lots of email that > doesn't interest

Hi All, I have been reading about the HFS+ filesystem compression on Snow Leopard and how copying or cloning over system files with rsync and other tools results in them being expanded on destination. I was wondering if there was any thoughts on updating rsync to accommodate this? It is kind of a shame to the lose the benefits of the new compression. Thanks, Rob

On 31-Jul-08, at 2:38 PM, Dan Gohman wrote: > On Jul 31, 2008, at 7:22 AM, Nicolas Capens wrote: >> In the same breath I’d also like to kindly ask if someone could have >> a look at the reverse operations, namely trunk from 128 to 64 bit >> using movdq2q, and 128 to 32 and 64 to 32 using movd. This also >> seems related to Bug 2585. Thanks again. > > The operations

Does 'make check' allow just running on a particualar directory of tests ? Many thanks in advance, Aaron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20090617/e0dc48e4/attachment.html>

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Stefanus Du Toit <stefanus.dutoit at rapidmind.com> wrote: > /* snip PointerIntPair bug */ I had made a toy language a month ago to catch back up to the latest svn LLVM api and for some reason anytime I used a compare operator (<, =, or > are all this toy language has) that was inside a function definition (a prime example is this code "(begin