I'm observing a rather strange behaviour when attempting to transfer files from
a Linux box (RH 7.3, kernel 2.4.19-rc1) to HP-UX 11.11 box. Both are running
rsync 2.5.5.
Everything starts off really nice an quick, but the transfer then slows down to
a crawl. On 100 Mb/s network I'm getting a few
I already posted about this ,but nobody seemesd to care
On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 17:36:07 + (UTC)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
> Currently, if IPv6-enabled rsync is run as --daemon, it will perform
> a wildcard bind(2) on an AF_INET6 socket and expect that IPv4 traffic
> will
NetBSD has the same problem
On Sun, 28 Jul 2002 17:36:07 + (UTC)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
> Currently, if IPv6-enabled rsync is run as --daemon, it will perform
> a wildcard bind(2) on an AF_INET6 socket and expect that IPv4 traffic
> will be forwarded to the v6 socke
On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 12:40:56PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 28 Jul 2002, Michael Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > rsync does not sync the timestamp on symlink (Solaris 8).
> >
> > It is probablly due to the limitation of Unix implementation
> > of symlink, but I would like to know why rs
On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 12:40:56PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 28 Jul 2002, Michael Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > rsync does not sync the timestamp on symlink (Solaris 8).
> >
> > It is probablly due to the limitation of Unix implementation
> > of symlink, but I would like to know why rs
On 28 Jul 2002, Michael Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> rsync does not sync the timestamp on symlink (Solaris 8).
>
> It is probablly due to the limitation of Unix implementation
> of symlink, but I would like to know why rsync/Unix does not
> do this, and what we can do about it. Is the conclu
Since writing this I've recompiled with zlib 1.1.4 and everything appears
smooth. Since this is intermittant, I'll send it off anyways in the hops that
someone else may see it. It also *might* apply to the "known issues"
entry about "unexpected close." (Similar symptoms, but it may just be a sh
Currently, if IPv6-enabled rsync is run as --daemon, it will perform
a wildcard bind(2) on an AF_INET6 socket and expect that IPv4 traffic
will be forwarded to the v6 socket (IPv4 mapped address, RFC2553).
This has never worked on OpenBSD which disallows IPv4 mapped addresses
for security reasons
rsync does not sync the timestamp on symlink (Solaris 8).
It is probablly due to the limitation of Unix implementation
of symlink, but I would like to know why rsync/Unix does not
do this, and what we can do about it. Is the conclusion that
"rsync syncs everything except the timestamp on symlink"
On Sun, Jul 28, 2002 at 05:39:22PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 27 Jul 2002, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The server has no need to deal with cleint limitations. I
> > am saying that the protocol would make the bare minimum of
> > limitatons (null termination, no nulls in names).
>
On Sat, Jul 27, 2002 at 02:04:02PM -0700, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, jw schultz wrote:
> > What i am seeing is a Multi-stage pipeline.
>
> This is quite an interesting design idea. Let me comment on a few
> things that I've been mulling over since first reading it:
>
> One thin
On 27 Jul 2002, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The server has no need to deal with cleint limitations. I
> am saying that the protocol would make the bare minimum of
> limitatons (null termination, no nulls in names).
It probably also makes sense to follow NFS4 in representing
paths as
12 matches
Mail list logo
