similar to: rsync based on checksum only

I wish to sync a bunch of flac files that reside in various subfolders to the root of a folder on a destination. An example of the directory structure on the source is: source> tree Music/ Music/ ??? R ? ??? Radiohead ? ? ??? OK Computer ? ? ??? 01 - Radiohead - Airbag.flac ? ? ??? 02 - Radiohead - Paranoid Android.flac ? ??? Red Hot Chilli Peppers ? ??? Greatest

I have 5 or 6 :-( different copies of a filesystem on various Linux boxen, all backups taken at different times, with different exclusions, and squirreled away. Now's the time to clean up my attic. I'd like to merge them all into one big filesystem. When there are different copies of the same files, I'd like to keep the newest; I don't know what else to do. My plan (assuming

Hello, I'm using rsync to make backups. In my dataset, however, there are a few encrypted Truecrypt volumes. When these files are modified, the content changes but the timestamps are not updated. Thus, rsync will not sync these files by default. I would like to keep the behavior of Truecrypt and have rsync update the files correctly. Using the --checksum option comes to mind in this case.

Hi All, I came into a strange issue running rsync on directory with ~500,000 files. Some of the file, although with same time stamps and size on source and destination, were different on the destination. The destination is just a mirrored area, and the data written to it, is just the one that comes through rsync. Needless to mentioned, that when I remove files and synced them again it works, or

I have restored my home directory in the past using rsync but never the entire system. If I rsync / (on my usb drive containing the backup) to / on the computer with a fresh install of the OS, what problems will I run into? What about links? I am presently triple booting 3 linux distros and want to delete one to install something else. The distro I'm installing will be on 3 partitions (/,

Hello, I have a situation where I have numerous files with numerous hard links to each of them on an ext3 RHEL4.2 system. Some of these files are duplicates of the others. I would like to re-link all of the duplicates to point to a single inode. For instance if file1 has hardlinks link1 and link2, and file2 has hardlinks link3 and link4, I need to change it so that link1, link2 (these

Hi @all! I have two questions: - First, am I right that the chance of getting the same 32-bit rolling checksum is 1/2^16 and to get the same 128-bit MD5 Hash is 1/2^127? - Finally I want two know if it is possible to change an amount of blocks manually? e.g. I made a 100 MB file with "dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/test.xyz bs=1M count=100" and know I want to change, lets say, 10 blocks of

Hi, I've been trying to use "--checksum-seed" to speed up backups . I have a homebrew script which creates incremental backups using hardlinks. To save disk space I turn on --checksum so that when file's mod-times change rsync doesn't create a new file (breaking the hardlinking) unless the contents of the file are different as well. I tested the command: #rsync -aHiy

Hi all, I have some questions about hardlinks, alternate storage and compression. I already scanned the list for related information and I have an idea of how things works, but I would like to have a definite answer. System spec: - CentOS 6.6 x64 - dovecot-2.0.9-8.el6_6.4.x86_64 RPM package/version - sdbox mail store 1) About hardlinks: when sending the same message to two different

> centos 7.x is latest, so if you need help upgrade make a bug report to > centos, not waste your time here since you choiced a precompiled > problem, reporting here 7s helpfull if you use dovecot compiled with > the latest version here, this migth be a unknown bug you then have > found, but not if you use precompiled problems, then report to the > maintainers of such software

On 30 Nov 2015, at 10:21, Gionatan Danti <g.danti at assyoma.it> wrote: > > So, let me do a straigth question: is someone using dovecot/LMTP with hardlinking? To me, this seems a _very_ important feature, and I wonder if I am doing something wrong or if the feature (hardlink+sieve) simply does not exists. Hardlink+Sieve has never worked. The fix is a bit complicated. Here's my

I apologize if this has already been discussed before, but as of yet I have been unable to find any info on the topic. I have a very simple (and common) disk based backup system using rsync, hard links, and a little bit of perl to glue it together. Remote machines are backed up regularly using hardlinks across each snapshot to reduce disk usage. Recently I learned that rsync does a

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello, I restored a filesystem by using rsync to copy directories and files from a backup volume to the newly recreated volume. All of the re-created files were given the current date and time rather than the original file's timestamp. I am sure there was a way to prevent that from happening. Is there a way to use rsync to set the timestamps

The rsync 2.5.6 TODO file mentions the need for hard link test cases. Here is one in which a linked file is unnecessarily transferred in full. # Setup initial directories mkdir src dest dd if=/dev/zero bs=1024 count=10000 of=src/a 2>/dev/null rsync -a src/. dest/. ln src/a src/b # At this point, a & b exist in src; only a exists in dest. rsync -aHv src/. dest/.

[This email is either empty or too large to be displayed at this time]

On 14/07/15 08:17, Steffen Kaiser wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Mon, 13 Jul 2015, Gionatan Danti wrote: > >> On the other hand, private (per-user) sieve file works without >> interfering with hardlinks. In a similar manner, disabling sieve also >> permits dovecot to create multiple hardlinks for a single message. >> >>

Hi, hardlinking (-H) works perfectly while using a syntax like -avhxSDH <SRC> <DEST> Now I have to mirror multiple SRC directories which contain hardlinks. e. g: src1/a is a hardlink to src2/b -RavhxSDH SRC1 SRC2 DEST does not preserve hardlink a and b in DEST. Is there any chance to do that? Thanks lopiuh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

While installing rsync on a new Sun Netra running Solaris 2.8, two tests (chgrp and hardlinks) failed. I found that these tests execute rsync while other successfull tests exectute $RSYNC. It is fortunate that my shell path was quite restricted and that no earlier version of rsync was installed on my path. The system would have run the chgrp and hardlinks tests with an earlier rsync if it had

Hi All, Any inputs on this issue? -- Shedi On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 5:12?PM Shreenidhi Shedi < shreenidhi.shedi at broadcom.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > Copying the content from the GH issue as is. > Need your inputs on the same. > FWIW, the coredump files generated in linux have xattr values which are > > 32 bytes. > > https://github.com/WayneD/rsync/issues/569

Hi Javier, thanks for your reply. I already checked SIS and, while interesting, is not what I want, because: 1) it can be difficult to restore a single message/attachment from a backup 2) only the attachments, and not the entire messages, are deduped. Message-based hardlinks really exists for a reason. The good news is that I found _why_ they are not working: it depends from how dovecot and