I've just compiled 2.5.6 release on Tru64 V5.0A (configure detects
alphaev67-dec-osf5.0, gcc release is a 3.1.1).
rsync fails using rsync:/// syntax.
> lct@goliath(32) [rsync-2.5.6]$ ./rsync rsync://stitch/
> rsync: getaddrinfo: stitch 873: servname not supported for ai_socktype
> rsync error: er
Is there away to just generate the differences? When
using the --write-batch option the system you sync
with still gets sync'd along with the --write-batch
files being generated to be sent and applied to other
systems.
I need this to work in 2 stages, rsync between machine
a and machine b and on
The packaging/lsb/rsync.spec file is broken as shipped: It has a "Sept"
month (rpmbuild here takes only 3-letter month names), and RH gzips the
manpages, so the %files list can't find them. I also added doc/README-SGML
and doc/rsync.sgml to the %doc files. Patch follows.
Thanks for all the good wo
Hi,
This is a newbie type'o'question so I'm most probably talking about
something I know nothing about ;)
Would it be possible to archive files on a removable drive, save the
checksums for the archived files, and later compare existing files against
the saved checksums without plugging in the rem
Hi [EMAIL PROTECTED],
when trying to use rsync there's an error message:
10.80.12.6: Connection refused
rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (0 bytes read so far)
rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at io.c(151)
there are 2 servers, both have RedHat 7.3 instal
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 02:30:50PM +0200, Niko Nyman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a newbie type'o'question so I'm most probably talking about
> something I know nothing about ;)
>
> Would it be possible to archive files on a removable drive, save the
> checksums for the archived files, and later comp
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 05:37:34PM +0500, Eduard A. Ivanov wrote:
> Hi [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>
> when trying to use rsync there's an error message:
> 10.80.12.6: Connection refused
> rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (0 bytes read so far)
> rsync error: error in rsync protocol data s
has someone come up with a trick to let disconnected ssh connections be
recovered without terminating and having to restart rsync (perhaps by
wrapping ssh or something)?
i have a very large (but pretty stable/unchanging) tree of files that i
need to sync daily, at night, between two geographica
FYI.
Yeah
actually I found my mistake.
In
the config file I had path=/blah/blah/
The
real thing is path=/blah/blah/*
It
worked.
Thanks.
-Message
d'origine-
De :
Green, Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Envoyé : 27 janvier,
2003 17:44
À :
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; Green, P
on 28.1.2003 15:06, jw schultz at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Would it be possible to archive files on a removable drive, save the
>> checksums for the archived files, and later compare existing files against
>> the saved checksums without plugging in the removable drive? I imagine in
>> theory t
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 06:41:20AM -0700, David Garamond wrote:
> has someone come up with a trick to let disconnected ssh connections be
> recovered without terminating and having to restart rsync (perhaps by
> wrapping ssh or something)?
>
> i have a very large (but pretty stable/unchanging) t
Dave Dykstra wrote:
> I give up. The msleep(100) consistently causes hangs of the
> unsafe-links test on my friend's cygwin Windows 2000 machine. I
> suspect it's also the reason why the build.samba.org cygwin machine
> hasn't reported a result in the last 9 hours. I'm taking it back out
> and w
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 09:00:35AM -0500, Patrick Amirian wrote:
> FYI.
> Yeah actually I found my mistake.
> In the config file I had path=/blah/blah/
> The real thing is path=/blah/blah/*
>
> It worked.
Poor solution. Common error. Much better to fix the
permissions on /blah/blah
Using * me
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 04:13:10PM +0200, Niko Nyman wrote:
> on 28.1.2003 15:06, jw schultz at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >> Would it be possible to archive files on a removable drive, save the
> >> checksums for the archived files, and later compare existing files against
> >> the saved checks
Well I have no permission problems... I'm running my commands as root.
With path = /a/b/ it didn't work but it worked with path = /a/b/*
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] De
la part de jw schultz
Envoyé : 28 janvier, 2003 09:39
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
O
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 09:57:17AM -0500, Patrick Amirian wrote:
>
>
> Well I have no permission problems... I'm running my commands as root.
>
> With path = /a/b/ it didn't work but it worked with path = /a/b/*
link_stat . : Permission denied
means you do have a permissions problem.
Unless yo
Bu mesajýn içeriðini düzgün bir þekilde göremiyorsanýz, www.e-talep.com/tanitim adresini ziyaret edebilirsiniz.Neden ? E-ticaretNeden ? E-talep.comTicaretin %35'i internete taþýnacak, sizde yerinizi alýn !!!2005 yýlýna kadar firmalar arasý ticaretin %35'inin elektronik ortama taþýnacaðý tahmin edi
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 01:26:32PM -, Max Bowsher wrote:
> Dave Dykstra wrote:
> > I give up. The msleep(100) consistently causes hangs of the
> > unsafe-links test on my friend's cygwin Windows 2000 machine. I
> > suspect it's also the reason why the build.samba.org cygwin machine
> > hasn't
I've had the good fortune of getting a short-term job, but it is going
to be very intense and I won't have time for the rsync mailing list.
I'm sure the rest of the rsync team will be able to cover most of the
questions and future updates, and I've told them they can contact me if
they need my help
Thanks to all for your help. I got it working and am in the process of
refining my configuration to do what I need it to do. I wish I could
tell you everything I did to get it working but it would be too
confusing. I finally started over and that's what made everything start
working.
Thanks aga
Hello.
I just started messing around with RSync to
synchronize some RRD files between a couple BSD/Linux
boxes. To test, I'm just trying to sync about 20 of
these files which are about 256KB each. It seems that
the full contents of each file are being transferred
each time; i.e., the incremental
I hacked config.h to undefine HAVE_SOCKETPAIR. Cygwin's socketpair was
failing randomly, causing errors on roughly a third of testsuite runs.
Having made that alteration (so rsync was using pipe, not socketpair), I ran
the testsuite 100 times. SSH tests were not enabled.
Out of 100 runs, 4 hung on
To follow up on this... I found the --stats option and
here's what I'm getting:
Number of files: 36
Number of files transferred: 36
Total file size: 10200816 bytes
Total transferred file size: 10200816 bytes
Literal data: 10200816 bytes
Matched data: 0 bytes
File list size: 576
Total bytes written
James Kilton wrote:
> To follow up on this... I found the --stats option and
> here's what I'm getting:
>
> Number of files: 36
> Number of files transferred: 36
> Total file size: 10200816 bytes
> Total transferred file size: 10200816 bytes
> Literal data: 10200816 bytes
> Matched data: 0 bytes
>
> James Kilton wrote:
> > To follow up on this... I found the --stats option and
> > here's what I'm getting:
> >
> > Number of files: 36
> > Number of files transferred: 36
> > Total file size: 10200816 bytes
> > Total transferred file size: 10200816 bytes
> > Literal data: 10200816 bytes
> > Matc
Thanks for the help guys. Turns out that I was using
two different versions: 2.55 (RedHat) and 2.54
(OpenBSD). I hadn't noticed that the OpenBSD package
was 1 version off. I installed 2.55 on another Linux
machine and the files now sync fine incrementally.
Add this one to the "duh" category. ;
I'd like to suggest that this is now a great time to create two separate cvs
branches for the rsync product. One, which I'll tentatively call 2_5, would
hold the version of the code that has been released to the world as 2.5.6.
The other, which I'll tentatively call head, would hold the development
On 28 Jan 2003, "Green, Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think splitting the branches will also let us be a little more
> experimental in the development branch, at least until we get near
> the next release phase, because we'll always have the field release
> in which to make crucial bug fixe
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 03:24:57PM +1100, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 28 Jan 2003, "Green, Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think splitting the branches will also let us be a little more
> > experimental in the development branch, at least until we get near
> > the next release phase, because
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 03:24:57PM +1100, Martin Pool wrote:
> I agree that this would be a good approach if and only if there is
> energy to do lots of development in the head branch. What do you have
> in mind?
I have several patches that I'm planning to check in soon (I'm waiting
to see if we
> I have several patches that I'm planning to check in soon (I'm waiting
> to see if we have any post-release tweaking to and/or branching to do).
> This list is off the top of my head, but I think it is complete:
And I have several things I would like to work on and submit:
- Fix the MD4 block
31 matches
Mail list logo
