similar to: recent discussion regarding 'checksums'

How do I make rsync ignore and not report or update certain parts of the [l]stat(2) struct or checksum when selecting which items to report or update in a hierarchy? For example, I want to run: rsync -Haxi --delete /hier1/ /hier2/ and have it NOT do anything if say ONLY the modtime differs. Leaving out or in the --times [-t] option from the expansion of -a to -rlptgoD obviously does not do this.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7854 Summary: Abysmal sparse file performance Product: rsync Version: 3.0.7 Platform: x86 OS/Version: FreeBSD Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: grarpamp at gmail.com

I have a 5.5GB file, mostly sparse. Tar performs far[!] better than rsync. I have no ideas yet, so just an FYI as to current state. FreeBSD 8.1 i386 zfs Yes, I know the blocks used differs but don't know why yet, could be just how zfs does things or related to the large amount of sparseness. There are no media errors, CPU/IO load or anything like that and the source and dest paths are on the

>> used it forever anyways and haven't seen a commit since January nor >> a release since 2007... > what's queued up for the next release, see http://flac.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/flac/flac/doc/html/changelog.html Hmm interesting, so given the above timeframes, should one presume that cvs head is indeed stable/release quality and that it's an ok thing to

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8265 Summary: Long paths, hardlinks, 'special' files [was: Regression: sockets for 3.0.9pre1] Product: rsync Version: 3.0.9 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: blocker Priority: P1 Component: core AssignedTo:

Hi. rsync 3.0.8 FreeBSD RELENG_4 i386. rsync -Haxi --delete /.../ /.../ The first pathspec above (residing on zz, a full filesystem) is: /vvvv/wwww/xxxx/zz/ The second pathspec above (residing on yyy, an empty filesystem) is: /vvvv/wwww/xxxx/yyy/zz/ It's obviously a 'copy everything over' operation. I've had to obfuscate the pathnames, however the exact pathlength throughout

Hi. I'm preparing to start a major encoding project, about a TiB or so. Flac is one of the components I plan on using. As I've used it forever anyways and haven't seen a commit since January nor a release since 2007... Is there a general status of flac along with a roadmap available? Only one suggestion: sign the releases with OpenPGP. Thanks for flac! :)

There were a few notes in this thread that may indicate open areas for development. I forward merely as FYI. http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2015-January/024231.html ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Peter Gutmann <pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz> Date: Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 9:29 PM Subject: Re: [Cryptography] Why aren?t we using SSH for everything? To: calestyo at

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5801 Summary: Sparse (-S) option doesn't work with new files Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org ReportedBy:

> whilst at the same time the development has ceased. I've found some > severe issues with OggFLAC that essentially make it a useless format > for streaming, no one cared. Yes, this is sad. cdparanoia, which could be considered a strong opensource meatspace partner to FLAC (along with cdda2wav) is also effectively dead. All three living on only in the ports trees of various operating

>> Oh I don't doubt the basics, red book is red book and bits are >> identically replicable and re rippable bits. > > I don't see any problem with taking innovation as far as is practical > and saying "it's finished, no more updates". Sure, basics :) Again, I'm meaning in regard to about bugs, docs, porting and nits. > If I want to do freedb

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8053 Summary: Older C compilers don't allow in-line declarations flist.c:1653 Product: rsync Version: 3.0.8 Platform: All OS/Version: FreeBSD Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org

Hi. It has been some time since I posted to the list, and may be some time in the future until I have an oppurtunity to revisit FLAC. So, as I have been quite satisfied yet always mindful with FLAC, I simply wanted to encourage any potential cumulative bugfix release... and or repository tag/update as such... should it be warranted. It would not go unappreciated by the base users, myself included.

I THINK YOUR A VERY SAD BUNCH OF LIFES WAISTERS On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 7:00 PM, <rsync-request at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Send rsync mailing list submissions to > ? ? ? ?rsync at lists.samba.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > ? ? ? ?https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync > or, via email, send a message with subject or body

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 8:39 PM, grarpamp <grarpamp at gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, this is sad. cdparanoia, which could be considered a strong > opensource meatspace partner to FLAC (along with cdda2wav) > is also effectively dead. All three living on only in the ports trees of > various operating systems. Minor bugs and doc fixes are always > needed. What's worse is, when

On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Adrian Chadd <adrian at freebsd.org> wrote: > ... that's .. odd. > > Let's poke the freebsd crypto and network stack people and ask. I > can't imagine why this is a problem anymore and we should default to > it being on. I don't think there's a crypto@ list, though security@ might represent. > The other thing you could

Hello puppet users, I´de like to switch from md5 checksums to md5lite to save a few cpu cycles on my (overloaded) puppetmaster. so it is just replacing md5 to md5lite within my manifests and I´m done or do I have to keep things like the local clientbucket in mind? are there any procedures/recommondations regarding this? I´m running puppet >= 3.1.x on my puppet minions and master. bye ,

Being new at distro SOPs, I don't know if this is an unusual thought. With a kernel debug package (or any such debug package) would it be prudent in todays world to have a checksum or signature process to assure the downloaded file is untampered with and complete? What prompts this is I just downloaded the kernel packages that Johnny put up. I had not realized they were so large and thought

Hello, A little informal input on the TCP/UDP checksum deferral/offload: it fails for me. I have one Xen host, running a snapshot of xen-unstable at 2006-03-24 (9435:11fee62328cc). Each of its domUs are allocated their own /30, with the help of a hacked-up vif script. Prior to working around the problem, Domain-0 could establish TCP connections to other domains. In the case of SSH, it would

Hi, have you ever considered adding checksums to http://libguestfs.org/download/ (minor request) -- Evaggelos Balaskas - Unix System Engineer http://gr.linkedin.com/in/evaggelosbalaskas