On Feb 25, 2009, at 12:00 PM, Rob Rye wrote:
The following note never went through yesterday for some reason:
You probably know all of this already, but for those not familiar with
the mysteries of the Unix side of the Mac OS X, allow me to comment
here:
Assuming /usr/local/bin is in your $PATH (otherwise you must add it
first), there are at least two solutions to the path problem, in
which
rsync 2.6.9 (in /usr/bin) is in front of rsync 3.0.5 (in /usr/
local/bin)
1: rename /usr/bin/rsync to /usr/bin/rsync269, so that if you
should
ever want to downgrade, you just have to change the name back to /
usr/
bin/rsync and away you go.
I don't think I'd advise this in general. If someone else has an
application or script that expects the Apple-shipping version of
rsync, those apps or scripts will break. Apple's version and version
3 have different arguments (-E specifically conflicts). It's probably
best -- in general -- to update your $PATH or, even better, explicitly
indicate a custom $PATH in any scripts that you write to include /usr/
local/bin.
This method also avoids any issues with OS updates reinstalling/
updating the built-in rsync.
Mike
2: change your $PATH, so that /usr/local/bin comes before /usr/bin.
Then whatever version of rsync, or anything else, you have in /usr/
local/bin will be the version of that application that your Mac
sees.
Personally, I feel more comfortable keeping /usr/bin first in the
path
and I just always rename the Mac default versions whenever they get
reinstalled by an OS update, but there is really nothing wrong with
this solution, and it certainly is more permanent.
Under Leopard (MacOS X 10.5.x) rsync version 2.6.9 is installed by
default in /usr/bin. Whenever Apple updates the system and does
anything that "updates" rsync it will check if rsync 2.6.9 is
present
as "/usr/bin/rsync". If it does not find it it will "helpfully"
reinstall it for you. Thus, every time Apple "updates" anything
with
regard to rsync and reinstalls it you have to rename it again, if
you
use solution 1... which can be a pain in the neck.
--Rob
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 20:21 +0100, Kurt wrote:
> is "rsync --version" reporting the wrong version number, or am I
to
> stupid to properly install rsync-3-0-5 on a Mac?
>
> Here is what I did:
> download and extract rsync-3-0-5 (btw: why is there an extra
patches
> folder?)
> in Terminal I ran: ./configure, make, sudo make install
> There was no error message, and the old /usr/local/bin/rsync was
> replaced.
>
> When I now issue "rsync --version" I get:
> rsync version 2.6.9 protocol version 29
> Copyright (C) 1996-2006 by Andrew Tridgell, Wayne Davison, and
others.
> <http://rsync.samba.org/>
> Capabilities: 64-bit files, socketpairs, hard links, symlinks,
> batchfiles,
> inplace, IPv6, 32-bit system inums, 64-bit
internal inums
>
> which is not what I expected.
Make sure your $PATH is set so that the rsync you installed will be
found first. When you have this right, "which rsync" should
print /usr/local/bin/rsync .
--
Matt
--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the
mailing list.
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing
list.
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing
list.
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list.
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
