- Forwarded message from Jesse Kenyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Jesse Kenyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: rsync question
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 09:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
we are backing up are cobalt server to are mac os x
server using rsync but when we go to restore fil
On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 05:43:17PM +1000, Kevin Easton wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at 05:18:42PM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at 11:46:37PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at 04:57:15AM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
> > > > > On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
> Thanks for the discription of how gzip-rsyncable actually works. I should
> learn to do some more research before shooting my mouth off. I must have
> sounded pretty clueless... the heuristic reset idea is brilliant.
Of course it is: Tridge came up with
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
> window of the data in the file (so that it is position-independent, but
> data-dependent). You simply perform a compression reset whenever this
> heuristic is true (and N should be a number that's large enough so that you
> don't reset too often, yet
> "BE" == Ben Escoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote the following on Tue, 04 Jun 2002 10:02:58 -0700
KE> When I finally took the time to properly read Rusty's
KE> "gzip-rsyncable" patch[1] while writing this mail, I discovered
KE> that it appears to use this same general technique, alt
> "KE" == Kevin Easton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote the following on Tue, 4 Jun 2002 17:43:17 +1000
KE> When I finally took the time to properly read Rusty's
KE> "gzip-rsyncable" patch[1] while writing this mail, I discovered
KE> that it appears to use this same general technique, al
On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 05:43:17PM +1000, Kevin Easton wrote:
[...]
> If you'll indulge me, I'll just restate the problem (as I see it, anyway)
> before chiming in with my idea...
[snip big discription of why gzip-rsyncable actually does work]
Thanks for the discription of how gzip-rsyncable act
An e-mail message delivery attempt failed because the message contained
an attachment that Xcel Energy classifies as a security risk. The sender
has been notified and instructed to contact you for an alternate form of
delivery. This activity has been logged.
Please do the following:
-- Review Xce
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
name=top_back_15[1].jpg
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID:
/9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgEASABIAAD/7QdYUGhvdG9zaG9wIDMuMAA4QklNA+0KUmVzb2x1dGlv
bgAQAEf/tAACAAIAR/+0AAIAAjhCSU0EDRhGWCBHbG9iYWwgTGlnaHRpbmcgQW5nbGUA
BHg4QklNA/MLUHJpbnQgRmxh
> On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at 05:18:42PM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at 11:46:37PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at 04:57:15AM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at 08:51:26PM +1000, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, May 31, 2002
10 matches
Mail list logo
