On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 04:22:22PM -0700, Noam Birnbaum wrote:
> Ah, but then the million dollar question: if this new version supports
> OS X ACLs, does it also support OS X resource forks?
Resource forks on OS X have been supported for a while now -- they
are handled via the --xattrs option by r
Ah, but then the million dollar question: if this new version
supports OS X ACLs, does it also support OS X resource forks?
Thanks,
noam
Noam Birnbaum
http://maccentricsolutions.com/
877.luv.macs x89
Apple Certified Technical Coordinator
Apple Certified Help Desk Specialist
On Oct 4, 20
We are using rsync for several years, but since a couple of months
we use it to backup remote servers, some with more than 200GB capacity.
Especially Windows users sometimes have the (bad) habit to change
the name of a directory with huge amounts of data below them.
We see the same nasty results
wondering if the only option to have rsync 3 running is have a glibc 2.4+?
I have a backup server and many other servers running cpanel on them so
a glibc update is not an option as it could skrew up the systems. Any
idea or workaround? Or i should to stick with old versions of rsync?
Thanx in ad
On 10/5/07, Wayne Davison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For the next "feature release" of rsync after 3.0.0, I'm imagining
> adding support for a database API that would allow extra information
> about files to be maintained and used (completely optional, of course).
Does this mean you plan to cont
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 01:57:22PM -0600, Frank Thomas wrote:
> This action is the simplest method of performing an rsync, but it
> would be nice to have rsync to be intelligent enough to recognize a
> name change but not an inode change on the source.
For the next "feature release" of rsync after
Frank Thomas, on 10/4/2007 3:57 PM, said the following:
it would be nice to have rsync to be intelligent enough to recognize
a name change but not an inode change on the source.
Seems to me the best way to accomplish this is to be sure that the
parent directory is not a directory that someone
Cwrsync 2.0.10.3001 packages are available for testing.
Regards
Tev
Download link:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/sereds/cwRsync_2.0.10.3001_Installer.zip
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/sereds/cwRsync_Server_2.0.10.3001_Installer
.zip
==
cwRsync VERSIO
Can I compile this for cygwin or has someone already done so?
_
Stephen Zemlicka
Integrated Computer Technologies
PH. 608-558-5926
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Matt McCutchen
Sent: Th
On 10/4/07, Manuel Kissoyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wondering if there are somewhere to download an rpm version for centos?
My RPM will probably work fine on CentOS, as it is based on the Fedora
packaging and Fedora is similar to CentOS. If you want a pure CentOS
package, you or I could rebu
On 10/5/07, Jake Conk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think whatever your reading is probably wrong. It doesn't make sense
> or else like wha you said nothing will be able to communicate over
> jumbo frames.
*Jumbo* frames are fine. In one place in your original message, you
made a typo and called
I think whatever your reading is probably wrong. It doesn't make sense
or else like wha you said nothing will be able to communicate over
jumbo frames.
Jake
On 10/5/07, Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/5/07, Jake Conk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't get it.
>
> According t
On 10/5/07, limule pika <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/28/07, Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [...] If remembering the contents of even one of the
> > directories makes rsync run out of memory, you'll have to do something
> > different.
>
> Thanks for your reply.I think that there
On Thu 04 Oct 2007, Wayne Davison wrote:
> I've just released rsync 3.0.0pre1, the first pre-release version for
> the upcoming 3.0.0 release. The version number is getting such a large
I've prepared a Debian package, version 3.0.0~pre1-1.
It's been uploaded to the "experimental" distribution.
O
On Thu 04 Oct 2007, Frank Thomas wrote:
>
> 1. rsync recognizes that Directory1 is not on server1,
> but it's inode still is. Rsync reads the new directory name and flags
> the name change from Directory1 to DirectoryNew on server1.
The problem here is that rsync is stateless; i
At 01:26 05.10.2007 -0700, Miles Raymond wrote:
>I'm not using rsync through ssh since this is on an internal network. Would
>pipes still be used?
>
>The only difference I can tell between my situation and Alain's is that my
>case the windows client is sending files instead of receiving.
>
>Are
I'm not using rsync through ssh since this is on an internal network. Would
pipes still be used?
The only difference I can tell between my situation and Alain's is that my case
the windows client is sending files instead of receiving.
Are there any suggestions for a work-around other than swi
On 9/28/07, Matt McCutchen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Fabian's suggestion to use the CVS rsync with incremental recursion is
> good; that will be an improvement. However, rsync still has to
> remember all files in S1 that had multiple hard links in case they
> show up again in S2. If remember
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5008
Summary: make check fails on Cygwin (default-acls)
Product: rsync
Version: 3.0.0
Platform: x86
OS/Version: Other
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
19 matches
Mail list logo
