Have you fsck'ed the filesystems on both ends?
Have you checked to make certain network pipes don't get magically
broken in between both ends? (Many connections have issues in which a
given pipe will only stay open for [x] amount of time, or [x] amount of
idle time, before being closed by a ro
I checked and I also double checked with our network admin. There is no VPN
or Firewall between the servers. There is no need because it is a direct
connection.
-Original Message-
From: jw schultz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 1:07 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sub
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 03:36:51PM -0600, Bryan Sauser wrote:
> I connecting to two offsite over servers, that are connected over dedicated
> T1 lines. I'm using the same script on both servers. One runs fine, but the
> other starts, gets the file list and processes a few folders. Then it will
> ha
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 11:52:17AM +, Adam Sampson wrote:
> Since sanitize_path modifies its first argument in place, the path
> that open() gets there hasn't been sanitized
Ouch! I've just checked in a fix. I didn't free the strdup() memory
because I wanted to leave the value sanitized, jus
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 12:32:47AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Can rsync preserve the timestamp of an original when it is copied?
You can find the answer to this in the man page as well as in the help
output, just look for the word "time". (Hint: -t)
> For that matter, I run rsync in both
I checked and everything is owned and run by root on both sides.
Just want to update the Problem Machine's info is actually:
Linux version 2.4.20-19.8 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc
version 3.2 20020903 (Red Hat Linux 8.0 3.2-7))
-Original Message-
From: Tom Allen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sen
Hiya.
While merging the 2.6.0 changes into our modified version of rsync, I
noticed the following bit of code in 2.6.0's options.c:
extern int sanitize_paths;
if (sanitize_paths)
sanitize_path(strdup(files_from), NULL);
filesfrom_fd = open(files_from, O_RDO
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 11:31:42AM +0100, Kate Ward wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 03:49:12PM -0400, Matt Miller wrote:
> >>I have seen this error in many postings, but the solutions seem not to
> >>apply in this case. This error happens during a small file transfer
> >>(gif image) and after
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 03:49:12PM -0400, Matt Miller wrote:
I have seen this error in many postings, but the solutions seem not to
apply in this case. This error happens during a small file transfer
(gif image) and after 75% of a 165G rsync job (the building file list
portion is complete.) Mo
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 11:40:50AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Why does using --delete -b --backup-dir relative/path
> puts the deleted files in the target folder,
> while using the full path works as expected?
What you describe is exactly as expected.
Like --link-dest and --compare-dest,
If I run "rsync -ruv " twice, no files are copied the
second time - as expected. However, if I follow "rsync -ruv
" with "rsync -ruv ", all files are copied from
to .
I suspect this is because the timestamps of files are of when
they were copied from to , hence more recent than the
last
11 matches
Mail list logo
