Re: name too long problem?

2012-02-16 Thread Wayne Davison
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Carlos Carvalho wrote:

> filename overflows max-path len by 1: 
>

Count the characters in the displayed  and you'll see what the
max_path value is.  That message is output by the sender, and indicates
names that are too long to put into the stream of file-list data.  Since
rsync currently uses paths from a single chdir, you cannot send files that
overflow the OS's max-path limit when referenced by the in-transfer path +
filename.

..wayne..
-- 
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

Re: name too long problem?

2012-02-15 Thread Carlos Carvalho
Kevin Korb (k...@sanitarium.net) wrote on 15 February 2012 15:12:
 >It seems possible that it is the temporary file name.

Yes. After sending the other message I noticed that the amounts rsync
lists as exceeding max-path cannot be explained by a prefix at the
sender:

Carlos Carvalho (car...@fisica.ufpr.br) wrote on 15 February 2012 18:09:
 >Benjamin R. Haskell (rs...@benizi.com) wrote on 15 February 2012 09:46:
 > >On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Carlos Carvalho wrote:
 > >
 > >> In the latest 3.1 I get this in our backup:
 > >>
 > >> filename overflows max-path len by 1: 
 > >> filename overflows max-path len by 1: 
 > >> filename overflows max-path len by 9: 
 > >> filename overflows max-path len by 7: 
 > >> filename overflows max-path len by 4: 
 > >> filename overflows max-path len by 5: 
 > >> filename overflows max-path len by 6: 

The sender prefix in this case is 7 chars long, so it cannot explain
two of the overflows above.

In this case I think rsync could reduce the temporary name to fit in
max-path. I thought Wayne had put a patch about something similar but
I don't remember the details (maybe there was something related to
wide chars).

 >That would be easy to test. Find the longest filename (or any that
 >fails) and attempt to touch a file with the temporary name that
 >rsync would use.

It doesn't say which tempname it'd use, just the filename that failed.

 >If that is the problem then --inplace would be a workaround.

It didn't work here. Besides, there are may situations where it cannot
be used, so if rsync could avoid the problem it'd be better.

Another possibility is to set temp-dir to a shorter path than the
file. I put it to the root of the tree but it also didn't work.
-- 
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


Re: name too long problem?

2012-02-15 Thread Kevin Korb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

It seems possible that it is the temporary file name.  That would be
easy to test.  Find the longest filename (or any that fails) and
attempt to touch a file with the temporary name that rsync would use.

If that is the problem then --inplace would be a workaround.

On 02/15/12 09:21, Carlos Carvalho wrote:
> In the latest 3.1 I get this in our backup:
> 
> filename overflows max-path len by 1:  filename overflows
> max-path len by 1:  filename overflows max-path len by 9:
>  filename overflows max-path len by 7:  filename
> overflows max-path len by 4:  filename overflows max-path len
> by 5:  filename overflows max-path len by 6: 
> 
> Both sender and receiver are linux machines, so the max-path is
> the same. Locale/lang are both set to C and --no-iconv is used. How
> can a name overflow in the receiver but exist in the sender? Can it
> be due to the temporary extension?

- -- 
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
Kevin Korb  Phone:(407) 252-6853
Systems Administrator   Internet:
FutureQuest, Inc.   ke...@futurequest.net  (work)
Orlando, Floridak...@sanitarium.net (personal)
Web page:   http://www.sanitarium.net/
PGP public key available on web site.
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk88EZsACgkQVKC1jlbQAQeiJQCeJfkps3CIMPW47iHlggSEYZLu
qqkAnjP103y9JgVauKwftlIIjUP44mZE
=nBdg
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
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


Re: name too long problem?

2012-02-15 Thread Carlos Carvalho
Benjamin R. Haskell (rs...@benizi.com) wrote on 15 February 2012 09:46:
 >On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Carlos Carvalho wrote:
 >
 >> In the latest 3.1 I get this in our backup:
 >>
 >> filename overflows max-path len by 1: 
 >> filename overflows max-path len by 1: 
 >> filename overflows max-path len by 9: 
 >> filename overflows max-path len by 7: 
 >> filename overflows max-path len by 4: 
 >> filename overflows max-path len by 5: 
 >> filename overflows max-path len by 6: 
 >>
 >> Both sender and receiver are linux machines, so the max-path is the 
 >> same. Locale/lang are both set to C and --no-iconv is used. How can a 
 >> name overflow in the receiver but exist in the sender? Can it be due 
 >> to the temporary extension?
 >
 >Presumably, you're not syncing from root to root.  So:
 >
 >Files on sender:
 >/this/is/some/long/path # assume it's max-path length
 >
 >rsync -R /./this/is/some/long/path remote:/backups/
 >
 >Then, on the receiver, this path len is way too long:
 >/backups/this/is/some/long/path
 >
 >One way to fix that would be to sync to a shorter prefix.  (mv /backups 
 >/b).

On the receiver, which starts the process, I cd /to/path and then do
rsync options origin:from/ ./
Therefore there are no prefixes on the receiver.

Could these messages be from the sender? If so, is there a trick with
--rsh to cd to the path in the sender before launching rsync there?
This is what happens when connecting to a daemon but for backups we
use ssh.

If it's necessary to use "DAEMON FEATURES VIA A REMOTE-SHELL
CONNECTION" will it do the chroot (it'll run as root)?
-- 
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


Re: name too long problem?

2012-02-15 Thread Benjamin R. Haskell

On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, Carlos Carvalho wrote:


In the latest 3.1 I get this in our backup:

filename overflows max-path len by 1: 
filename overflows max-path len by 1: 
filename overflows max-path len by 9: 
filename overflows max-path len by 7: 
filename overflows max-path len by 4: 
filename overflows max-path len by 5: 
filename overflows max-path len by 6: 

Both sender and receiver are linux machines, so the max-path is the 
same. Locale/lang are both set to C and --no-iconv is used. How can a 
name overflow in the receiver but exist in the sender? Can it be due 
to the temporary extension?


Presumably, you're not syncing from root to root.  So:

Files on sender:
/this/is/some/long/path # assume it's max-path length

rsync -R /./this/is/some/long/path remote:/backups/

Then, on the receiver, this path len is way too long:
/backups/this/is/some/long/path

One way to fix that would be to sync to a shorter prefix.  (mv /backups 
/b).


--
Best,
Ben
--
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


name too long problem?

2012-02-15 Thread Carlos Carvalho
In the latest 3.1 I get this in our backup:

filename overflows max-path len by 1: 
filename overflows max-path len by 1: 
filename overflows max-path len by 9: 
filename overflows max-path len by 7: 
filename overflows max-path len by 4: 
filename overflows max-path len by 5: 
filename overflows max-path len by 6: 

Both sender and receiver are linux machines, so the max-path is the
same. Locale/lang are both set to C and --no-iconv is used. How can a
name overflow in the receiver but exist in the sender? Can it be due
to the temporary extension?
-- 
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