DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7799] Deletion of NetWare trustees is not propagated

2010-11-21 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7799 --- Comment #4 from ivan.solo...@gmail.com 2010-11-22 00:06 CST --- I use rsync on SUSE Linux Enterprise server with NSS file system(not on NetWare). If I start strace with rsync at synchronization it will help? -- Configure bugmail:

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7799] Deletion of NetWare trustees is not propagated

2010-11-21 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7799 --- Comment #3 from m...@mattmccutchen.net 2010-11-21 23:12 CST --- (In reply to comment #2) > The extended attributes it not function of products Novell. Novell uses > standard interfaces for access granting to the features. I have resu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7799] Deletion of NetWare trustees is not propagated

2010-11-21 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7799 --- Comment #2 from ivan.solo...@gmail.com 2010-11-21 22:45 CST --- The extended attributes it not function of products Novell. Novell uses standard interfaces for access granting to the features. I have resulted structure of the metadat

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3653] Reduce the need for the "vanished files" warning

2010-11-21 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3653 --- Comment #21 from m...@mattmccutchen.net 2010-11-21 21:12 CST --- (In reply to comment #20) > AFAICS, delete_in_dir() suppresses deletion when /any/ flag is set in > io_error: > > if (io_error && !ignore_errors) { Indeed, t

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7809] New: I/O errors other than IOERR_GENERAL should not suppress deletion

2010-11-21 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7809 Summary: I/O errors other than IOERR_GENERAL should not suppress deletion Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: n

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3653] Reduce the need for the "vanished files" warning

2010-11-21 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3653 --- Comment #20 from jr-sambabugzi...@quo.to 2010-11-21 19:43 CST --- (In reply to comment #19) > You're right that the IOERR_GENERAL flag (which corresponds to that message) > stops all destination files from being deleted. But it is o

Re: Two problems: -u together with -c and and a symlink problem

2010-11-21 Thread Matt McCutchen
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 18:33 +0100, Helmut Jarausch wrote: > I have two problems with rsync > > 1st) if I give both commandline options -u and -c > it looks as if a file which is more recent but different > on the destination is not updated, i.e. -u overrules -c > Is that true? Yes

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 7799] Deletion of NetWare trustees is not propagated

2010-11-21 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7799 m...@mattmccutchen.net changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|rsync don't full syncronise |Deletion of NetWare trustees

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3653] Reduce the need for the "vanished files" warning

2010-11-21 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3653 --- Comment #19 from m...@mattmccutchen.net 2010-11-21 17:57 CST --- (In reply to comment #18) > What's also annoying is that a "vanished file" warning triggers: > > "IO error encountered -- skipping file deletion" > > which if I'm not