DO NOT REPLY [Bug 6916] Avoid bundling a modified zlib

2009-12-17 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6916 --- Comment #5 from jzel...@redhat.com 2009-12-17 02:23 CST --- Well, it's possible. I'm not rsync maintainer for long, so I don't have that much knowledge about the situation. But my point was that zlib's upstream is willing to consider

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 6996] New: syncing backups - autodetect older variants already existing on receiver

2009-12-17 Thread samba-bugs
https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6996 Summary: syncing backups - autodetect older variants already existing on receiver Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: Other OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW

Re: Rsync shortcutting output?

2009-12-17 Thread Joel Peabody
>From what I’ve read, there are no hard limits on what rsync will accept as far as amount of data to transfer, number of files, or the size of any one file. However, in looking at the output of one particular job it looks like it’s just putting out directories when it gets to a new one, and not th

Re: Rsync shortcutting output?

2009-12-17 Thread Paul Slootman
On Thu 17 Dec 2009, Joel Peabody wrote: > > PS, this is between two Redhat machines using rsync 2.6.8 on both ends. > Upgrading rsync is not an option in this case. What I always wonder when reading such messages, is what type of response is expected, if a problem with the tool is suspected but u

Re: Rsync shortcutting output?

2009-12-17 Thread Joel Peabody
> On Thu 17 Dec 2009, Joel Peabody wrote: >> >> PS, this is between two Redhat machines using rsync 2.6.8 on both ends. >> Upgrading rsync is not an option in this case. > > What I always wonder when reading such messages, is what type of > response is expected, if a problem with the tool is suspec