[Bug 13083] [PATCH] Use both partial file + basis file

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13083 Ben RUBSON changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |LATER Status|NEW

[Bug 8001] Is MAXPATHLEN set properly on FreeBSD?

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8001 --- Comment #3 from Ben RUBSON --- Some additional info : https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184340 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid

[Bug 13920] --max-delete and dirs being replaced by symlinks on source

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13920 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|NEW

[Bug 13974] Old max block size isn't allowed in options

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13974 --- Comment #1 from Wayne Davison --- Thanks for the patch. I've put something similar into options.c to fix this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid

[Bug 14328] usleep() is obsolete, use nanosleep()

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14328 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 13982] rsync calls exit() from signal handler

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13982 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 13912] Fix a few typos in rsync.yo

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13912 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 13974] Old max block size isn't allowed in options

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13974 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 13735] Synchronize files when the sending side has newer change times while modification times and sizes are identical on both sides

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13735 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|REOPENED

[Bug 11101] support writing to devices

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11101 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 11561] [PATCH] Show progress information when SIGINFO is caught on platforms that have it

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11561 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 14328] usleep() is obsolete, use nanosleep()

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14328 --- Comment #2 from roland --- thanks, too! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options:

[Bug 14163] RSYNC_SSL_PORT env should be set for invocation of --rsh command

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14163 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 14126] The atomic-rsync script can exit 0 when the operation failed.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14126 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 13445] Fuzzy searching in link-dest tries to open regular file as directory

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13445 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 12769] error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) depending on source file system

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12769 --- Comment #8 from Roland Haberkorn --- Is it possible to totally get rid of the restriction? I'd prefer running in out of memory situations rather than in this restriction. Without I could just throw some more RAM on the machine, with this

[Bug 14328] New: usleep() is obsolete, use nanosleep()

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14328 Bug ID: 14328 Summary: usleep() is obsolete, use nanosleep() Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

[Bug 14163] RSYNC_SSL_PORT env should be set for invocation of --rsh command

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14163 Björn Jacke changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED

[Bug 14338] New: ZSTD support

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14338 Bug ID: 14338 Summary: ZSTD support Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5

[Bug 13071] [PATCH] Allow --partial-dir with --inplace

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13071 --- Comment #7 from Ben RUBSON --- Wayne, thank you very much for your detailed answer and for your patch proposal. Let me go through this and come back to you shortly. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

[Bug 13071] [PATCH] Allow --partial-dir with --inplace

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13071 --- Comment #8 from Ben RUBSON --- Wayne, I then just tested your patch, and it works as expected. One thing perhaps, just to be sure. I used an absolute partial-dir path during my tests. It is not deleted after the partial file has been

[Bug 13071] [PATCH] Allow --partial-dir with --inplace

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13071 --- Comment #6 from Wayne Davison --- Created attachment 15941 --> https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=15941=edit A simpler patch that just uses in-place updates of partial-dir files when possible -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 13071] [PATCH] Allow --partial-dir with --inplace

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13071 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #5 from Wayne

[Bug 13071] [PATCH] Transfer a resumed --partial-dir file in-place

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13071 --- Comment #10 from Ben RUBSON --- Many thanks Wayne for the merge ! Your idea about trying to guess, when current transfer aborts, whether or not the partial file will help for the next transfer more than the basis file, sounds rather good.

[Bug 13749] Add more extensions to DEFAULT_DONT_COMPRESS

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13749 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 12569] Missing directory errors not ignored

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12569 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #12 from Wayne

[Bug 13526] Hard link creation time

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13526 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Version|3.1.3 |3.2.0 Resolution|---

[Bug 13071] [PATCH] Allow --partial-dir with --inplace

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13071 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 7249] Add an option to use O_NOATIME

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7249 --- Comment #17 from Wayne Davison --- I just tweaked the option name to --open-noatime, which I think is clearer. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid

[Bug 14377] rsync rsync_xal_set lsetxattr failed invalid argument

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14377 --- Comment #1 from sa...@e-schuett.de --- Target drive on destination rsync server: /dev/ufsid/x on /mnt/Backu (ufs, NFS exported, local, journaled soft-updates, acls) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact

[Bug 14377] New: rsync rsync_xal_set lsetxattr failed invalid argument

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14377 Bug ID: 14377 Summary: rsync rsync_xal_set lsetxattr failed invalid argument Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All OS: FreeBSD Status: NEW Severity:

[Bug 14365] 3.1.3 cygwin compilation failure

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14365 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 14371] Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14371 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|NEW

[Bug 14371] Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14371 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|NEW

[Bug 14371] Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14371 --- Comment #3 from Haravikk --- If I remove --delete-excluded then how do I ensure my backups remove items matching new exclusion rules? For example, if I identify a new cache folder or such that I don't want to copy, and it add to my exclusion

[Bug 13082] [REQ] Hardware / SSE based MD5 operations

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13082 --- Comment #1 from Ben RUBSON --- First info / first patch there : https://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2020-May/032175.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies

[Bug 12769] error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) depending on source file system

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12769 --- Comment #7 from Simon Matter --- I've patches like this to solve our issues: --- rsync-3.1.3/util2.c.orig2018-01-15 04:55:07.0 +0100 +++ rsync-3.1.3/util2.c2020-03-11 13:07:07.138141415 +0100 @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ return

[Bug 14323] New: Defaults for --skip-compress are not working, everything is being compressed

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14323 Bug ID: 14323 Summary: Defaults for --skip-compress are not working, everything is being compressed Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All OS: All

[Bug 14323] Defaults for --skip-compress are not working, everything is being compressed

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14323 --- Comment #1 from Simon Matter --- Did some more tests and found the bug was introduced between 3.0.9 and 3.1.0. It seems like handling of default values is not working as expected. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA

[Bug 14365] New: 3.1.3 cygwin compilation failure

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14365 Bug ID: 14365 Summary: 3.1.3 cygwin compilation failure Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: x64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: major Priority:

[Bug 14365] 3.1.3 cygwin compilation failure

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14365 --- Comment #1 from Jari Aalto --- FYI, I checked out the git and it compiles ok. 2020-04-29 f7746d00 If you could release a new version, this bug can be marked resolved -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the

[Bug 14371] New: Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14371 Bug ID: 14371 Summary: Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type Product: rsync Version: 3.2.0 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement

[Bug 14371] Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14371 --- Comment #4 from Wayne Davison --- You don't add an exclude rule, you add a hide rule. An exclude rule is a combination of a hide (server side) and a protect (client side). So you choose between the 3 idioms (hide, protect, exclude) depending

[Bug 13082] [REQ] Hardware / SSE based MD5 operations

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13082 --- Comment #5 from Ben RUBSON --- Really nice additions, it looks promising, thank you very much Jorrit & Wayne ! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid

[Bug 14371] Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14371 --- Comment #5 from Haravikk --- Oh, I see; so hide actually does what I need, you confused me with the mention of not using --delete-excluded, as it actually seems to work just fine with a mixture of hide and exclude rules for different items.

[Bug 13082] [REQ] Hardware / SSE based MD5 operations

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13082 --- Comment #3 from Ben RUBSON --- Yes, and as discussed there also, sounds like xxhash could be a better solution than SSE / hardware backed MD5. Feel free to close this then if not so relevant. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are

[Bug 13082] [REQ] Hardware / SSE based MD5 operations

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13082 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 14371] Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14371 Haravikk changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |--- Status|RESOLVED

[Bug 14371] Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14371 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 14371] Combined Exclude & Protect Filter Type

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14371 --- Comment #7 from Wayne Davison --- If you don't want something deleted on the receiving side, you need to protect it via either a protect rule or an exclude rule. Using --delete-excluded just turns all exclude rules into hide rules, which

[Bug 14390] New: Feature request: don't fail if using "-z" transferring to rsync complied with --with-included-zlib=no

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14390 Bug ID: 14390 Summary: Feature request: don't fail if using "-z" transferring to rsync complied with --with-included-zlib=no Product: rsync Version: 3.1.3 Hardware: All

[Bug 14529] New: Please add option to save metadata to single file to speed up backups

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14529 Bug ID: 14529 Summary: Please add option to save metadata to single file to speed up backups Product: rsync Version: 3.2.0 Hardware: All OS: All

[Bug 14529] Please add option to save metadata to single file to speed up backups

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14529 --- Comment #1 from Andras Korn --- It's completely fine if using this "database" in writable modules implies or requires `max connections = 1` to avoid concurrency/locking issues. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact

[Bug 14463] rsync 3.2.2 server protocol error

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14463 --- Comment #4 from Wayne Davison --- The pre-release patches aren't guaranteed to be backward compatible, and in this case the bits that were used in a couple different patches actually conflicted with each other. So, when --atimes was promoted

[Bug 14390] Feature request: don't fail if using "-z" transferring to rsync complied with --with-included-zlib=no

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14390 --- Comment #2 from Wayne Davison --- I've updated the compression code to add a negotiation idiom like I did for checksums, and then I re-enabled the external zlib's ability to handle both the old-style compression (now named "zlib") and the

[Bug 14390] Feature request: don't fail if using "-z" transferring to rsync complied with --with-included-zlib=no

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14390 --- Comment #3 from Sebastian A. Siewior --- (In reply to Wayne Davison from comment #2) I've sent a zstd patch, what do you want me to do with it (#14338)? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please

[Bug 14338] ZSTD support

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14338 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Wayne

[Bug 14338] ZSTD support

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14338 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 14390] Feature request: don't fail if using "-z" transferring to rsync complied with --with-included-zlib=no

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14390 --- Comment #4 from Wayne Davison --- Thanks for the gentle prod to remind me about 14338. As things currently stand, the master branch now has support for both zstd & lz4 compression. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA

[Bug 14338] ZSTD support

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14338 --- Comment #2 from Wayne Davison --- I'll note that I had to install an upgraded zstd lib to get this to work. I first tried 1.3.8 (since it was mentioned in the configure check) but it didn't have the right exported functions. Then then tried

[Bug 14390] Feature request: don't fail if using "-z" transferring to rsync complied with --with-included-zlib=no

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14390 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Wayne

[Bug 13320] file contents cause rsync to fail (with certains args and dir structure)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13320 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 14338] ZSTD support

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14338 --- Comment #4 from Sebastian A. Siewior --- Thanks for the merge! Sorry for the version. According zstd's git v1.3.8 contains ZSTD_compressStream2(). Debian Buster ships v1.3.8 and it does not find the function. Buh. Looking closer it is marked

[Bug 14338] ZSTD support

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14338 --- Comment #5 from Randall S. Becker --- Wondering about git 1.3.8, which is many years old. (Git platform maintainer here) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to

[Bug 14338] ZSTD support

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14338 --- Comment #6 from Wayne Davison --- The name "zlibx" is both for external and excluding of unsent data. It's listed first because it should be the safer choice with the weirdness in external zlib going on. The new compress items are listed

[Bug 10579] --xattr internal abbrev error

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10579 Haravikk changed: What|Removed |Added Version|3.1.0 |3.1.3 --- Comment #1 from Haravikk --- Just

[Bug 10738] report --stats output when termination signal arrives

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10738 --- Comment #7 from Ben RUBSON --- Don't know whether or not this could be closed, thanks to "kill -USR2 ". For the stats bug, let's refer to the whole report https://github.com/WayneD/rsync/issues/7. -- You are receiving this mail because: You

[Bug 12527] Sender waits for timeout when fuzzy basis file found

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12527 Ben RUBSON changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 14395] New: Add an option to remove exclude files from the source

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14395 Bug ID: 14395 Summary: Add an option to remove exclude files from the source Product: rsync Version: 3.2.0 Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity:

[Bug 14394] New: Add an option for --remove-source-files to remove files right away

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14394 Bug ID: 14394 Summary: Add an option for --remove-source-files to remove files right away Product: rsync Version: 3.2.0 Hardware: All OS: All

[Bug 12525] [PATCH] Avoid uploading whole file when transfer fails

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12525 Bug 12525 depends on bug 12522, which changed state. Bug 12522 Summary: [PATCH] Send last error messages to sender https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12522 What|Removed |Added

[Bug 12522] [PATCH] Send last error messages to sender

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12522 Ben RUBSON changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |MOVED Status|NEW

[Bug 12525] [PATCH] Avoid uploading whole file when transfer fails

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12525 Ben RUBSON changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 12498] --fuzzy --fuzzy hugely impacts performance even if its' not needed

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12498 Ben RUBSON changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |MOVED Status|NEW

[Bug 12819] [PATCH] sync() on receiving side for data consistency

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12819 Ben RUBSON changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |MOVED Status|NEW

[Bug 12838] [PATCH] Log sent/received bytes even in case of error

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12838 Ben RUBSON changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |MOVED Status|NEW

[Bug 12569] Missing directory errors not ignored

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12569 --- Comment #19 from Wayne Davison --- What in that sequence of events are you claiming is a bug? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing

[Bug 12569] Missing directory errors not ignored

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12569 --- Comment #21 from Wayne Davison --- Get rid of --no-implied-dirs and --ignore-errors is also unneeded. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the

[Bug 12569] Missing directory errors not ignored

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12569 --- Comment #23 from Marc Krämer --- @Wayne: thanks, you're right. I've overlooked this option and didn't expect it to be harmful. Removing it really solves the issue. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.

[Bug 12569] Missing directory errors not ignored

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12569 --- Comment #22 from Wayne Davison --- The --no-implied-dirs code was recreating the directories after they had been deleted. I changed it to avoid that if the entry it is processing is marked as missing. I also silenced the parent-dir warning

[Bug 12569] Missing directory errors not ignored

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12569 --- Comment #20 from Wayne Davison --- Oops, I missed the "ls" at the end. I'll give it a look. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing

[Bug 14463] rsync 3.2.2 server protocol error

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14463 --- Comment #3 from bumkick...@yahoo.com --- It's not a trivial exercise to upgrade the rsync version on the target system, so it would be useful if there was some kind of "back patch" available | suspect there might be others with similar issues

[Bug 14463] rsync 3.2.2 server protocol error

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14463 --- Comment #2 from bumkick...@yahoo.com --- (In reply to Wayne Davison from comment #1) What should we do instead to keep the same functionality? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use

[Bug 14463] New: rsync 3.2.2 server protocol error

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14463 Bug ID: 14463 Summary: rsync 3.2.2 server protocol error Product: rsync Version: 3.2.0 Hardware: All OS: FreeBSD Status: NEW Severity: normal

[Bug 14463] rsync 3.2.2 server protocol error

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14463 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 11166] running with -vvv causes a hang

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11166 --- Comment #9 from Michal Ruprich --- Hi, current rsync still hits this problem when transferring huge amounts of files. I am talking tens of thousands. I tried this with some 700k files and it got stuck at the same place as before. What worked

[Bug 13113] receive_xattr heap overflow when prepending RSYNC_PREFIX

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13113 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 4573] Hide/protect filtering of xattrs by name

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4573 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 13241] A problem with test for xattrs transfer

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13241 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 6546] Rsync incurs errors trying to remove "security.selinux" xattr

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6546 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|REOPENED

[Bug 12569] Missing directory errors not ignored

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12569 --- Comment #13 from Tomas Korbar --- Hi Wayne, There is a report on this in RHEL too [0], and i reproduced it also in Fedora. Did you make any progress? I can help with implementation of fix if you want. Thanks for any information you can

[Bug 12569] Missing directory errors not ignored

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12569 --- Comment #14 from Wayne Davison --- As I mentioned above, I've already fixed the issue and left this open as a reminder to look into an even better solution in the future. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the

[Bug 12569] Missing directory errors not ignored

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12569 --- Comment #15 from Tomas Korbar --- Ah. Sorry about that. I misunderstood your previous comment. Thanks for clarification. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to

[Bug 12769] error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) depending on source file system

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12769 --- Comment #11 from MulticoreNOP --- I want to add that the original implementation also leads to the following error: ERROR: out of memory in flist_expand [sender] rsync error: error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) at util2.c(106)

[Bug 13433] out_of_memory in receive_sums on large files

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13433 --- Comment #5 from MulticoreNOP --- might be related to bug #12769 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or

[Bug 12769] error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) depending on source file system

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12769 MulticoreNOP changed: What|Removed |Added CC||multicore...@mailbox.org --- Comment #9

[Bug 12769] error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) depending on source file system

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12769 --- Comment #10 from MulticoreNOP --- (In reply to Simon Matter from comment #7) #define MALLOC_MAX 0x1 is greater than uint32-MAX, therefore will overflow and result in an unpredictable and unfriendly manner. #define MALLOC_MAX

[Bug 12769] error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) depending on source file system

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12769 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug 12769] error allocating core memory buffers (code 22) depending on source file system

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12769 --- Comment #13 from MulticoreNOP --- (In reply to Wayne Davison from comment #12) Hi Wayne, that is great news! Could you shine some light on why there is such a limit in the first place? Personally I think such an arbitrary limit is rather

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >