On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 09:11:43AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote: > The notes say to use --no-d, but using it seem not to help, and in > fact the remote host is still sent the 'd' option:
Yeah, the code was erroneously overriding the --no-d option, so I fixed that in the latest version (see 3.0.1pre1). I also added an easier way to request the backward-compatible "-r --exclude='/*/*'" options by using a new option: --old-d. > Is this expected behavior now ? The -d option was added in 2.6.4, almost exactly 3 years ago. There seems to be a significant amount of 2.6.3 still around (which is 3.5 years old), which is a little sad to see, but I suppose not that unexpected. In 3.0.1pre1, rsync tries to detect if the -d option is the cause of a file-listing failure and suggests the use of the --old-d option to work around the issue. Hopefully the public rsync servers will be upgrading before too long, as there has been a significant amount of security fixing going on in recent months, and it would be good for them to at least be running 2.6.9 (with extra security patches), if not 3.0.1 itself. ..wayne.. -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
