similar to: Improved output (dry run)

I want to use rsync to diff two folders (with checksum) by using dry-run and itemize changes like this: rsync -rni --checksum /dir1/ /dir2/> ~/Desktop/diff.log However, I read that in --dry-run rsync wont do checksums. Is this true? If it is, is there a way to force checksums i dry-run mode?

I chose rsync over diff -r because diff -r is a binary comparison and it takes longer than creating a checksum. Isn't that correct? I did not understand this: > Rsync isn't even smart enough to not bother checksumming things that don't even have a comparison file. --checksum seems to work as you say even in --dry-run mode. At least it takes a lot of time, which should be a good

Try as we may (--dry-run), it still won't tell us where it intends to put the files, $ rsync --dry-run --remove-source-files --relative --verbose --itemize-changes -Cavz Maildir/new /tmp/ sending incremental file list delta-transmission disabled for local transfer or --whole-file cd+++++++++ Maildir/ cd+++++++++ Maildir/new/ >f+++++++++ Maildir/new/1546157908.1392_1.jidanni7 total:

Hi, I'm using rsync to backup my files. I have also added a pre-backup step where the script checks if there is enough space on the destination for rsync to run successfully. The goal is to make room (delete oldest backups) if that's not the case. I'm running rsync with -ahAXS --numeric-ids --link-dest options. For my pre-backup step, I'm currently using the same options +

On Sat Jan 10 2015 at 5:21:33 AM Kevin Korb <kmk at sanitarium.net> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > What does --itemize-changes say about that file? Try using the stat > command on the various copies of it to see what is different about them. > In my original message, I stated I used --itemize-changes, and I reported the following: >

Rsync is a remarkably handy tool that I use virtually every day. But there is one thing about rsync that drives me totally crazy. Under the -n (dry run) flag, rsync seems to produce exactly the same output as without that flag. I cannot tell you how many times I sit and scratch my head long and hard,after I discover that my intended rsync operations did not actually happen. Until I finally

Hi to all rsync users. rsync's `--delete' option works fine in the following example: I'm sending all the content of /home/rodolfo from machine1 to /home/rodolfo in machine2: $ rsync --dry-run -vrtul --delete --exclude='/.*' . 192.168.0.2:/home/rodolfo , and --delete works perfectly. Instead, in this other example: $ rsync --dry-run -vrt --delete --modify-window=1 file1

On 5/5/20, Kevin Korb via rsync <rsync at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Rsync != diff. What do you mean? I only need to know what files are not the same, but I don't need to know what the differences are with the files. > However, if that command lists a file something is different about it. > add --itemize-changes to find out what. I see this output. What does

This is looking good and very helpful to an rsync novice. I will try the modification rsync --dry-run -avi --delete --filter 'protect /*’ --filter ‘protect /.*’ SOURCE/ TARGET/ and see what it produces. I do have a number of directories and files beginning with a dot in TARGET and these need to be protected. Unfortunately, the output from —dry-run is still likely to be sufficiently

Hi: I've been using rsync for a couple years now. Unfortunately, I've made some changes on both ends, so it's unclear what could be the culprit. I make extensive use of --link-dest to provide a cheap "Time Machine"-like backup for a Windows machine. Source: Windows 7 running Cygwin (CYGWIN_NT-6.1 sith 1.7.33-2(0.280/5/3) 2014-11-13 15:47 x86_64 Cygwin) Destination: Synology

Ok, thank you for this extra info. I have experienced exactly what you described. The rsync dry run is _still_ running after being started at 1:30am PST :) But it is finding the right files to update. Most of the entries are: >fc........ Which is what I want. So, just because I see: >f at the beginning... That doesn't necessarily mean that the file is going to get updated at the

OK. Thanks. Where can I find information regarding how to interpret —itemize-changes? The timestamps aren’t changing, so the target must not be storing them, which I have no idea why. The directory I’m writing to is 777. What is the flag to tell rsync to ignore the timestamps? Thanks, Blake On 6/2/16, 6:18 PM, "rsync on behalf of Kevin Korb" <rsync-bounces at lists.samba.org on

Hello list, Using rsync version 3.1.0pre1 protocol version 31.PR14, I ran this command to sync two local filesystems: rsync -rvvctpgonh --itemize-changes --progress --stats --log-file=/root/rsync.log /mnt/ntfs/vmdk/ /mnt/ntfs/restore/ -r = recursive -vv = verbose -c = checksum compare -t = transfer modification times -p = set destination perms to match source -g = set destination group to

What about -c? It seems I'm getting a lot of spurious file transfer candidates when using: -avvznIi --no-o --no-g --no-p It's showing transfers (receive) for many files I know haven't been tampered with. Thanks, -Clint On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Kevin Korb <kmk at sanitarium.net> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > That is correct.

Thanks Kevin! I¹m unclear how to read the ‹itemize-changes output. Can you provide some insight? This is a local transfer from an external drive to an internal drive all attached to one computer. rsync -aPh --itemize-changes -n /Volumes/shuttle_05/2012_79_1_14_1__1199_Workprint /Volumes/3TB_LTO/LT003A/ sending incremental file list >f..t.......

> You are missing the point of the checksum. It is a verification that > the file was assembled on the target system correctly. The only > post-transfer checksum that would make any sense locally would be to > make sure that the disk stored the file correctly which would require > a flushing of the cache and a re-reading of the file. Rsync has no > capability to do this

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello, opensuse 13.2 linux v3.16.7-7-desktop x86_64 rsync v3.1.1 I used rsync to copy /usr/ to another volume with these options: - --recursive --one-file-system --links --stats --itemize-changes - --quiet --delete --times After I had modified the system to use the new /usr volume, I realized I should have added: - --perms --owner --group

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 5:49 PM Kevin Korb <kmk at sanitarium.net> wrote: > Nothing there should be preventing incremental indexing. That means it > should start copying as soon as it finds a file that needs to be copied. > Doesn't it tries to create all (empty) directories first? > On 03/20/2018 02:33 PM, Bráulio Bhavamitra wrote: > > > > > > Em seg, 19

I just copied a file system using xfsdump|xfsrestore At least 1 new directory had been created on the source during the xfer (took 9+hours -- 7TB), so I wanted to verify I hadn't missed anything. Using rsync: > rsync --version rsync version 3.1.0 protocol version 31 Capabilities: 64-bit files, 64-bit inums, 64-bit timestamps, 64-bit long ints, socketpairs, hardlinks,

Cool Thanks! Specifically, the timestamps on both <src> and <dest> match for "ls -l" but do not match for "ls -lu" or "ls -lc” The storage is just an regular HDD in a mac pro tower. I can’t imagine why it wouldn’t handle timestamps. Also of note - this problem doesn’t exist for every file, just the vast majority. So, that just makes it more confusing. Yes,