Re: MD4 checksum fix

2003-04-05 Thread Donovan Baarda
On Sun, 2003-04-06 at 16:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > It looks like it will work OK, but it's kinda ugly in that starts > > embedding version stuff into the mdfour implementation. Still... its > > better than the nothing I've produced :-) > > Yes, it's certainly not elegant. An alternative wo

Re: MD4 checksum fix

2003-04-05 Thread cbarratt
> It looks like it will work OK, but it's kinda ugly in that starts > embedding version stuff into the mdfour implementation. Still... its > better than the nothing I've produced :-) Yes, it's certainly not elegant. An alternative would be to have two different sets of MD4 routines and then have

Re: MD4 checksum fix

2003-04-05 Thread Donovan Baarda
On Sun, 2003-04-06 at 10:06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I agree, they should be done together. I don't have my original > > > patch but I can reimplement it with the correct remote_version > > > dependence and send it in the next couple of days (by Thursday > > > evening). My intent is the mi

Re: MD4 checksum fix

2003-04-05 Thread jw schultz
On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 04:06:25PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I agree, they should be done together. I don't have my original > > > patch but I can reimplement it with the correct remote_version > > > dependence and send it in the next couple of days (by Thursday > > > evening). My int

Re: MD4 checksum fix

2003-04-05 Thread cbarratt
> > I agree, they should be done together. I don't have my original > > patch but I can reimplement it with the correct remote_version > > dependence and send it in the next couple of days (by Thursday > > evening). My intent is the minimal set of changes, rather than > > changing the internals.

Transfer files bigger than 1383275520 bytes - Rsync compiled incygwin

2003-04-05 Thread David Starks-Browning
(Sorry, this is an old post, but I did not see a reply.) On Tuesday 25 Mar 03, Christian writes: > Hello, > > I can't transfer big files. In the output below, you can see that rsync only > transfer 1383275520 of a 5448046592 bytes file: > > F:\shells>rsync -e ssh -avz ./backup [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

Re: WARNING: rsync mirror is erased when remote HD-dies

2003-04-05 Thread Max Bowsher
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello, > > this is the excerpt from the rsync_backup.sh > > # OK the filesystems should be mounted > # lets start the rsync process > rsync -arlpogtDvx --delete --force /mnt/nfs_mirror_src /mnt/nfs_mirror_dest -a = -rlptgoD, so you can shorten that to -avx If nothing is

Re: WARNING: rsync mirror is erased when remote HD-dies

2003-04-05 Thread jw schultz
On Sat, Apr 05, 2003 at 12:10:41PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello, > > I faced a problem with rsync-ing like this > > server blue 3-HD's as Linux Sofware-RAID 0 (striping) - Webserver EXT3 > server green 3-HD's as Linux Sofware-RAID 0 (striping) - Backupserver EXT3 > > During the rsync-

WARNING: rsync mirror is erased when remote HD-dies

2003-04-05 Thread wilhelm.moser
Hello, this is the excerpt from the rsync_backup.sh # OK the filesystems should be mounted # lets start the rsync process rsync -arlpogtDvx --delete --force /mnt/nfs_mirror_src /mnt/nfs_mirror_dest Thank you for help or comments bye willi moser [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe or change

WARNING: rsync mirror is erased when remote HD-dies

2003-04-05 Thread wilhelm.moser
Hello, I faced a problem with rsync-ing like this server blue 3-HD's as Linux Sofware-RAID 0 (striping) - Webserver EXT3 server green 3-HD's as Linux Sofware-RAID 0 (striping) - Backupserver EXT3 During the rsync-2.4.6-13 process one of the HD's on blue died. Though rsync decided to remove the m