On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 10:27:16PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> jw schultz writes:
>
> > Soon, i hope. 2.6.1 is looking like a performance release.
>
> Can we get the craigb-perf patch in (sorry I haven't looked in CVS - maybe
> it is there)? Thanks to Wayne for porting the patch to 2.6.0.
jw schultz writes:
> Soon, i hope. 2.6.1 is looking like a performance release.
Can we get the craigb-perf patch in (sorry I haven't looked in CVS - maybe
it is there)? Thanks to Wayne for porting the patch to 2.6.0.
Craig
--
To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/l
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 09:57:32PM -0500, Alberto Accomazzi wrote:
>
> Let me take this opportunity to thank you personally for taking on the
> task of pushing out the latest rsync release and for your and jw's
> continuing work on this. I know a lot of people have contributed
> patches and id
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 09:21:39PM -0600, Brian Camp wrote:
> I'm trying to get rsync to exclude the directory
> "/home/www/users/ftp/pub/" from being copied in the command line below
> and have not been successful.
The important part of the man page on this is that exclusions are
relative to the
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 09:21:39PM -0600, Brian Camp wrote:
> I'm trying to get rsync to exclude the directory
> "/home/www/users/ftp/pub/" from being copied in the command line below
> and have not been successful. I've tried many combinations, such as
> dropping the /'s and adding *'s, witho
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 09:57:32PM -0500, Alberto Accomazzi wrote:
> I think you guys are doing a top-notch job.
Thanks!
> And while I'm still on the line: do you have any ideas about upcoming
> releases?
I was just mentioning to J.W. that I thought we had so much good stuff
already in CVS that
I'm trying to get rsync to exclude the directory
"/home/www/users/ftp/pub/" from being copied in the command line below
and have not been successful. I've tried many combinations, such as
dropping the /'s and adding *'s, without any luck.
/home/www/users/ftp/pub/ is not part of a symlink, bu
Wayne Davison wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 04:14:14PM -0500, Alberto Accomazzi wrote:
I am puzzled as to why I can't get the option --link-dest to work
properly. When I use this option when both source and destinations are
on a local filesystem the hard-linking of the target against the
link
Your question has been received. You should expect a response from us
by the next business day.
You may also update this question by replying to this message. Because
your reply will be automatically processed, you MUST enter your reply
in the space below. Text entered into any other part of this
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, jw schultz noted:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 12:21:13PM -0500, Aaron S. Hawley wrote:
>
> > I went with (:), seemed to be the choice of a few other man pages.
> Most of the time you now use () it is correct because
> context makes it a parenthetic. However, having done it
> t
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 04:14:14PM -0500, Alberto Accomazzi wrote:
> I am puzzled as to why I can't get the option --link-dest to work
> properly. When I use this option when both source and destinations are
> on a local filesystem the hard-linking of the target against the
> link-dest director
I am puzzled as to why I can't get the option --link-dest to work
properly. When I use this option when both source and destinations are
on a local filesystem the hard-linking of the target against the
link-dest directory does work, but when the source is a remote directory
(via ssh or rsync s
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 01:36:23PM -0600, Michael Glasgow wrote:
> I was wondering if it might be possible for an rsync developer to
> look over the attached patch (tested on Linux 2.4.24 against the
> rsync-2.6.0 release), and offer suggestions on how I could improve it.
>
> Basically I want to u
I was wondering if it might be possible for an rsync developer to
look over the attached patch (tested on Linux 2.4.24 against the
rsync-2.6.0 release), and offer suggestions on how I could improve it.
Basically I want to use Linux finer grained capabilities to retain
only CAP_SYS_CHROOT & CAP_DAC
I am trying to understand how match.c works.
I am reading the code and something doesnt look quite right. This is usually a sign
that I am missing something obvious.
Here is what I see.
build_hash_table uses qsort to order targets in ascending order of //tag,index// into
the array of checksum
15 matches
Mail list logo
