On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 06:27:49PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 06:02:35PM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
> > it might be a good idea to change IO to I/O to reduce the doubletake.
>
> Yes, I prefer I/O for input/output as well.
>
> > > dit(bf(-g, --group)) This option causes rsync to set the group of the
> > > destination file to be the same as the source file. If the receiving
> > > program is not running as the super-user, only groups that the
> > > receiver is a member of will be preserved (by group name, not group ID
> > > number).
> >
> > The parenthetic should be dropped. It will be by ID if
> > --numeric-ids is specified or a daemon is running chrooted.
> > Explaining that here would, i think, only confuse things.
> > Also, "receiving user" might be a better term.
>
> How about this text?
>
> dit(bf(-g, --group)) This option causes rsync to set the group of the
> destination file to be the same as the source file, as much as the
> receiving user's permissions permits. The preservation is done
> primarily by name, but falls back to using the ID number if no matching
> name is found. See also the --numeric-ids option.
It still seems awkard and may not be strictly true.
I'd leave it as is except to replace the paranthetic with
the text regarding --numeric-ids in the --owner section or
with:
Like --owner if the remote system is a daemon using
chroot, the --numeric-ids option is implied because
the remote system cannot get access to the
groupnames from /etc/group.
--
________________________________________________________________
J.W. Schultz Pegasystems Technologies
email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remember Cernan and Schmitt
--
To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
