Displaying 20 results from an estimated 500 matches similar to: "osx 10.6 strange rsync errors"
2011 Feb 24
1
osx 10.6 strange rsync errors
I've recently encountered this issue which was discussed here about a year ago.
I'm not sure if anyone has a fix for this, but I thought I would post my workaround here.
Since the topic is old, I'm summarising the problem .. basically it involves rsync creating large numbers of files with a leading ".." when syncing to an apple network share via afp.
The essence of the
2002 Jun 07
0
problem related to filename length
hi, all.
I had an problem with rsync-2.5.4/5 related to filename length.
On Linux box (kernel-2.4.18 + ext3 fs), filename length limits to
255byte, but rsync can't handle fn > (255 -9) byte. So I had an instant
hack to avoid this problem. Patch file attatched works fine in my case,
but I'm not sure that it is correct or not. Any suggestions ?
Please cc me, I'm not on this
2012 May 14
1
Patches for OS X.
What patch files are necessary to build rsync-3.0.9 for OS X 10.6.8 (Darwin
10.8.0)?
Mr. Bombich maintains an excellent page about this, but it's a bit out of
date, methinks, and his instructions point to patch files that return some
interesting errors.
My rsync-3.0.9 is working just fine, btw, with the fileflags and crtimes
and hfs-compression patches applied; I just wondered if the others
2001 Nov 13
2
direct write patch
I have attached a patch that supports a new "--direct-write" option.
The result of using this option is to write directly to the destination
files, instead of a temporary file first.
The reason this patch is needed is for rsyncing to a device where the
device is full or nearly full.
Say that I am writing to a device that has 1 Meg free, and a 2 meg file
on that device is out of date.
2004 Apr 27
1
[PATCH] Inplace option for rsync
Hi,
I have written a 'smallish' patch to implement the --inplace option
as discussed on this mailing list at various points in the past. It
makes a small modification to the sender algorithm so that it won't ask
the receiver to relocate blocks from earlier in the file when running
with the --inplace option.
I would appreciate any testing and feedback people can provide! I
2008 Oct 09
1
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 5820] New: rsync does not replace symlink atomically
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5820
Summary: rsync does not replace symlink atomically
Product: rsync
Version: 3.0.4
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: core
AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org
ReportedBy: rsync@sysoev.ru
2003 Aug 26
1
Tired of "filename too long"? Me too...
I assume there's some good reason for the way filenames are faithfully
maintained as temp files, but it's a little frustrating when you get
"filename too long" messages as a result... with no indication of what
file it was it's complaining about.
The obvious fix is to simply generate a tmpname and have done with it.
Possibly safer, truncate the filename, in case there's
2010 Nov 24
3
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7816] New: get_tmpname() can create invalid UTF-8 filenames
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7816
Summary: get_tmpname() can create invalid UTF-8 filenames
Product: rsync
Version: 3.0.7
Platform: Sparc
OS/Version: Solaris
Status: NEW
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: core
AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org
ReportedBy: msalmonse at
2014 Feb 21
1
Partial file creation tripping up on aufs volume - tries to use a reserved name
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I'm backing up a file named 'wh.txt' with the destination an aufs
volume - rsync creates a partial filename like '.wh.txt.M8ucDx', which
results in an Operation not permitted (1) error - aufs reserves
'.wh.*' names for whiteout records I think.
Other than ignoring the problem and using --inplace, it doesnt look
like I can
2003 Jan 18
1
possible typo/bug in receiver.c
The following code in receiver.c around line 421 (2.5.6pre1) contains
some dead code:
/* we initially set the perms without the
setuid/setgid bits to ensure that there is no race
condition. They are then correctly updated after
the lchown. Thanks to snabb@epipe.fi for pointing
this out. We also set it initially without group
access
2004 Feb 17
0
[patch] Add `--link-by-hash' option (rev 3).
This patch adds the --link-by-hash=DIR option, which hard links received
files in a link farm arranged by MD4 file hash. The result is that the system
will only store one copy of the unique contents of each file, regardless of
the file's name.
(rev 3)
* Don't link empty files.
* Roll over to new file when filesystem maximum link count is reached.
* If link fails for another reason, leave
2004 Feb 23
0
[patch] Add `--link-by-hash' option (rev 5).
This patch adds the --link-by-hash=DIR option, which hard links received
files in a link farm arranged by MD4 file hash. The result is that the system
will only store one copy of the unique contents of each file, regardless of
the file's name.
(rev 5)
* Fixed silly logic error.
(rev 4)
* Updated for committed robust_rename() patch, other changes in CVS.
(rev 3)
* Don't link empty
2004 Feb 17
1
[patch] Make robust_rename() handle EXDEV.
All callers of robust_rename() call copy_file() if EXDEV is received. This
patch moves the copy_file() call into robust_rename().
Patch Summary:
-12 +1 backup.c
-15 +2 rsync.c
-9 +33 util.c
-------------- next part --------------
patchwork diff util.c
--- util.c 2004-02-17 09:58:44.000000000 -0500
+++ util.c 2004-02-17 10:21:22.000000000 -0500
@@ -355,16 +355,40 @@
2004 Feb 23
0
[patch] Add `--link-by-hash' option (rev 4).
This patch adds the --link-by-hash=DIR option, which hard links received
files in a link farm arranged by MD4 file hash. The result is that the system
will only store one copy of the unique contents of each file, regardless of
the file's name.
(rev 4)
* Updated for committed robust_rename() patch, other changes in CVS.
(rev 3)
* Don't link empty files.
* Roll over to new file when
2004 Apr 11
1
fchmod in do_mkstemp? (patch included)
Why is do_mkstemp fchmod-ing the temporary file? I was not able to
figure this out from the CVS logs or my searches in the mail archives.
Currently, do_mkstemp does this (*):
mkstemp temporary file (which leaves it with 0600)
fchmod temporary file (final perm & 0700)
And then later it gets renamed to the final name and permissions set
to what they are supposed to be.
(*)
2002 Jul 24
0
couple of minor fixes to rsync 2.5.5
Dear friends!
I really appriciate the great job you did on rsync package and hope for its
further improvement and development. It works great in our pretty complex
environment and helps us a lot in our daily duties.
But we've run into couple of small inconveniences.
First one:
We use rsyncd to propagate a tree of html files among several web-servers.
That files are generated on the fly and
2003 May 21
2
patch to avoid race condition in rsync 2.5.6
There is a small race condition in rsync 2.5.6. When the transfer is
finished, and the file is moved into place, there is a short time
period where the new file is in place with the wrong permissions.
When using rsync on a busy email server to replace the exim config
file with a new file, exim will produce several complaints in that
short period. This small patch fixes the problem, by making
2001 Jan 25
0
ogg123/getopt/NAME_MAX
1. ogg123 still won't build systems that don't have <getopt.h>. Was
anything ever decided on how to procede with that? oggenc supplies its
own getopt implementation. The only function really in question is
getopt_long(), because getopt() is standard POSIX. See
http://www.xiph.org/archives/vorbis-dev/200012/0359.html for a discussion
of this issue.
2. Also, NAME_MAX is used in
2005 Jul 26
1
[patch] paranoid checksum checking
The attached patch provides an additional check for the checksumming
mode to ensure that a file that is actually written out to disk can be
read back and has the same MD4 sum as the file on at the originating
location.
Regards,
Nick.
-------------- next part --------------
*** rsync-2.6.6pre1/receiver.c 2005-04-14 02:42:13.000000000 +0100
--- rsync-new/receiver.c 2005-07-26
2002 Dec 05
1
Patch to ignore exluded files.
I came up with a patch to fix the problem of IO Errors caused by
excluded files as did Eugene V. Chupriyanov below.
Is there a chance that this change will show up in a future version of
rsync?
Is there a reason that we should not ignore IO errors when copy_links is
off? Just want to make sure that I'm not missing something here that
may corrupt my syncs....
Here's the version that