On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 03:25:39PM -0800, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:30:19AM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:45:46AM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
> > > The point of this exercise was to find a way to avoid unnecessary
> > > transfers of already existin
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:30:19AM -0800, jw schultz wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:45:46AM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
> > The point of this exercise was to find a way to avoid unnecessary
> > transfers of already existing files
> I thought the point was to reduce the memory footprint and
>
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 03:18:40PM -0600, Max Kipness wrote:
> > > > I have a tree structure on one server similar to the following:
> > > >
> > > > /Current
> > > > /01-04-2003
> > > > /01-03-2003
> > > >
> > > > etc...
> > > >
> > > > /Current holds the most recent rsynced data, and the dat
> > > I have a tree structure on one server similar to the following:
> > >
> > > /Current
> > > /01-04-2003
> > > /01-03-2003
> > >
> > > etc...
> > >
> > > /Current holds the most recent rsynced data, and the date
> > > directories are created with cp -al on a daily basis so they are
> >
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:56:49PM -0600, Max Kipness wrote:
> > I have a tree structure on one server similar to the following:
> >
> > /Current
> > /01-04-2003
> > /01-03-2003
> >
> > etc...
> >
> > /Current holds the most recent rsynced data, and the date
> > directories are created with
> I have a tree structure on one server similar to the following:
>
> /Current
> /01-04-2003
> /01-03-2003
>
> etc...
>
> /Current holds the most recent rsynced data, and the date
> directories are created with cp -al on a daily basis so they
> are hard-linked. I'm going back 60 days.
>
>
--On Wednesday, January 07, 2004 03:10:23 -0800 jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I've lost track of the number of times someone has
complained on this list because blah/blah/* didn't behave as
he expected and the problem went away when he dropped the
unnecessary wildcard.
Hmmm... given the
There is a small bug in the build system of 2.6.0:
If the directory you build rsync in differs from the sourcedir "make test"
failes:
$ tar -xzf ~/rsync-2.6.0.tar.gz
$ mkdir build
$ cd build
$ ../rsync-2.6.0/configure
$ make test
PASSunsafe-byname
PASSunsafe-links
- wildmat
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 10:26:16AM -, Jon Hirst wrote:
> Having had a night to sleep on this I think rsync's limit
> on filename globbing needs pointing out more clearly.
>
> I think we need:
>
> 1) An entry in the FAQ (Done)
>
> 2) A better error message from rsync when it exceeds the
>
Having had a night to sleep on this I think rsync's limit
on filename globbing needs pointing out more clearly.
I think we need:
1) An entry in the FAQ (Done)
2) A better error message from rsync when it exceeds the
limit. Saying:
rsync: read error: Connection reset by peer
rsyn
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 01:30:19 -0800, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The steps i see are:
>
> - The hlink_list change to a pointer array (just committed)
>
> - Create the union and change file_struct and the routines
> that reference and populate it to use the union for dev
> and inod
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:45:46AM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:03:13 -0800, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:04:34AM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
> >
> > The hardlinks have to be created in the receiver but the
> > logic of selecting whi
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:03:13 -0800, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:04:34AM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
>>
>> Right. You've just explained the here-to-fore unknown reason
>> why that sibling hlinking was being done in a separate, final
>> phase. If we keep it th
A new 2.6.0 feature is supposed to use a different exit code when the
only 'errors' were from files that disappeared between the building
of the file list and the actual transfer of files.
But if the client is local and the server is remote, IOERR_VANISHED
gets set on the remote server, but is nev
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:33:43AM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 22:33:06 -0800, Wayne Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I'd suggest also changing the last line of the function:
> >
> > -return file_compare(&f1, &f2);
> > +return file_compare(f1p, f2p)
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:04:34AM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:11:54 -0800, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 02:04:19AM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
> >> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [snip]
> >> > union links
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 22:33:06 -0800, Wayne Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'd suggest also changing the last line of the function:
>
> -return file_compare(&f1, &f2);
> +return file_compare(f1p, f2p);
>
> This is because the old way asks the compiler to take the address of
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:11:54 -0800, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 02:04:19AM -0600, John Van Essen wrote:
>> On Mon, 5 Jan 2004, jw schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [snip]
>> > union links {
>> > struct idev {
>> > INO64_T inode;
>> >
18 matches
Mail list logo
