I wouldn't blame the rsync team for not wanting to maintain it, it's a
pretty narrow-scope patch affecting only one OS. I'm pretty motivated
to keep it up, though, so I'll repost my patches to this list when I
update them. I'll probably get it updated to 3.1.0 in the next month
or so.
M
Mike, thanks for the patch. Will this patch be maintained in rsync-
patches-3.0.6.tar.gz ?
On Oct 28, 2009, at 1:20 AM, Mike Bombich wrote:
HFS compression can be preserved as long as the relevant xattr(s)
and flags on those files are preserved. A compressed file has the
compressed data
HFS compression can be preserved as long as the relevant xattr(s) and flags on those files are preserved. A compressed file has the compressed data in a hidden xattr (com.apple.decmpfs if < 4Kb, com.apple.ResourceFork if more), and has the UF_COMPRESSED flag set (decimal 40). When rsync encounter
Thanks. The C code that brkirch provides takes care of a lot of the
work, so hopefully someone will be able to provide a patch (Its been
over 15 years since I did any C programing, so unfortunately I won't
be able to contribute)
On Oct 28, 2009, at 12:08 AM, Matt McCutchen wrote:
Rsync
When rsync 3.0.6 copies files with HFS+ File Compression, the new
extended attribute decmpfs is not preserved, and the UF_COMPRESSED
flag is not set on the destination and the destination file is not
compressed.
I examined the destination file as described in ars technica (with ls
and
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 23:38 -0400, Tony wrote:
> When rsync 3.0.6 copies files with HFS+ File Compression, the new
> extended attribute decmpfs is not preserved, and the UF_COMPRESSED
> flag is not set on the destination and the destination file is not
> compressed.
>
> I examined the destin
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 19:31 -0400, Tony wrote:
> Are there any patches (or planned updates) to rsync v3.0.6 to handle
> the HFS+ File Compression that Apple introduced with Snow Leopard?
What kind of special treatment from rsync were you expecting? I read
http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2
