In <20160623205843.GB6633@kw.merryville>, on 06/23/16
at 11:58 PM, Albert Berger said:
Hi,
>I did some search about this error before asking this question, and in
>other case unsupported ACLs were indeed the cause. But btrfs supports
>ACLs:
In addition to what Kevin said, if you are rsync-in
Yes, btrfs supports ACLs but it might not support all of the ACLs that
ext4 supports.
If you just meant that the target system is used as a Samba server then
that doesn't really matter. If you meant that you are rsyncing to a
cifs mount of a samba server then that does matter because you are stuc
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 04:27:10PM -0400, Kevin Korb wrote:
> If the filesystem doesn't support ACLs then don't use -A.
>
I did some search about this error before asking this question, and
in other case unsupported ACLs were indeed the cause. But btrfs
supports ACLs:
[root@kw al]# getfacl /mnt/
If the filesystem doesn't support ACLs then don't use -A.
Also, why is there samba between rsync and btrfs?
On 06/23/2016 04:14 PM, Albert Berger wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> During migrating i686 installation of ArchLinux to x86_64, all filesystem was
> rsynced to a new location. Maybe this somehow
Greetings!
During migrating i686 installation of ArchLinux to x86_64, all filesystem was
rsynced to a new location. Maybe this somehow relates to the problem that has
appeared after migrating and that did not happen before: during backuping the
system, rsync reports the following error message:
I agree that the Tower of Hanoi distribution is a good method.
It ensures a better depth. And with 10 copies, it would really, really
be good depth.
With accounting systems though, it's good to have a backup of the data
just -before- they close the fiscal period...
(the call we get is -- OMG we
