On Sat, Oct 28, 2006 at 05:15:06PM +0200, Wesley W.Terpstra wrote:
> I would send patches, but I find it quite difficult to get patches
> against patches.
I actually don't like patches against patches. Your prior posting had a
patch against some pre-patched source, and that's the clearest way t
On Oct 28, 2006, at 12:58 AM, Wayne Davison wrote:
Yeah, the error checking is not up-to-snuff yet.
Sorry, when you said you'd checked it in, I assumed that meant you
were done with it and the final version was committed.
Now I've seen:
http://archives.free.net.ph/thread/
20061028.062640.
On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 01:37:45PM +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote:
> ... fake-super is never sent from the client...?
That code is just to prevent mischief from someone that might tweak
their client to send the option to a daemon.
> Your chmod change broke symlinks. do_chmod needs to see if the
On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:46 AM, Wayne Davison wrote:
http://rsync.samba.org/ftp/unpacked/rsync/patches/fake-super.diff
Does any of my patch remain?? ;-)
I don't understand the logic of clientserver.c:
if (lp_fake_super(i))
am_root = -1;
else if (am_root < 0) /* Trea
On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 03:55:09AM +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote:
> There are a couple bits I think belong in xattrs.patch instead.
> Specifically, storing EAs before ACLs in rsync.c and including the
> removexattr method.
I agree. I've added those bits to the xattr.diff. At some point the
x
On Oct 26, 2006, at 5:45 PM, Wayne Davison wrote:
I think this would be a useful thing to support. I don't like the
options tied in to source/dest, though as that makes it harder to
reverse a copy. I think that adding a single option, --fake-super
(since we already have --super) that does not g
On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 01:25:56PM +0200, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote:
> I was thinking of options like '--source-fake-root' and '--dest-fake-
> root'. The client turns '--dest-fake-root' into '--source-fake-root'
> on the remote rsync process.
I think this would be a useful thing to support. I d
