|
Wayne Davison wrote: Yes - ok - so ACLs aren't "officially" there yet. That's actually good in a way. Means there's room to do it right.Given a better implementation of the --acls option (i.e. one that doesn't complain if a source disk doesn't support ACLs), that might make sense. Another thing to keep in mind, though, is that rsync always passes the individual options to the remote rsync, so adding new options to -a makes it inconvenient to communicate with a variety of rsync versions. We'll need to balance these issues whenever ACL support gets officially included in rsync. Ultimately this is an option that should "just work" and be transparent as part of permissions. As to communicationg with a variety of rsync version perhaps there should be some initial communication about capabilities at the initial connection and adjust acordingly. Older versions would be assumed to not have ACL capability and that data wouldn't be sent. Or if the receiving file system doesn't support ACLs then that data is silently removed. |
-- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
