On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 06:09, Steve Bonds wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, bob parker bob_parker-at-dodo.com.au |Rsync List| wrote:
Maybe I'm barking completely up the wrong tree but here goes.
I've downloaded a 700meg iso by ftp using a steam powered dial up
connection. It took a week and
On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 05:57, Green, Paul wrote:
bob parker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] asks:
I've downloaded a 700meg iso by ftp using a steam powered dial up
connection.
It took a week and naturally many resumes.
Murphy's Law did not take a holiday of course so the md5sum of the
Is it possible to tell rsync to update the blocks of the target file=20
'in-place' without creating the temp file (the 'dot file')? I can=20
guarantee that no other operations are being performed on the file at=20
the same time. The docs don't seem to indicate such an option.
No, it's
I am rsyncing 1tb of data each day. I am finding in my testing that
actually removing the target files each day then rsyncing is faster than
doing a compare of the source-target files then rsyncing over the delta
blocks. This is because we have a fast link between the two boxes, and
bob parker wrote:
Actually in this instance there is no hierarchy, it is just one flat
700 meg iso. So my question is can rsync sort out out which parts of
it have errors and just download the corrupted parts of it?
Yes.
Transferring a file, whilst making use of bits of it that are already
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 00:42, Max Bowsher wrote:
bob parker wrote:
Actually in this instance there is no hierarchy, it is just one flat
700 meg iso. So my question is can rsync sort out out which parts of
it have errors and just download the corrupted parts of it?
Yes.
Transferring a file,
ArtBarker.com
Your #1 Art-Related Marketplace
(http://www.ArtBarker.com )
Just in case you were interested, we are currently running a
Winter special of HALF OFF the listed advertising rates (for as
many months as you wish to list!), so please contact us if you
would like more details on
CB == Craig Barratt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote the following on Wed, 05 Feb 2003 04:41:22 -0800
CB Of course, a major issue with --inplace is that the file will be
CB in an intermediate state if rsync is killed mid-transfer. Rsync
CB currently ensures that every file is either the original
On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Craig Barratt wrote:
Of course, a major issue with --inplace is that the file will be
in an intermediate state if rsync is killed mid-transfer. Rsync
currently ensures that every file is either the original or new.
I hate silent corruption. Much better to have things
On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Ben Escoto wrote:
CB == Craig Barratt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote the following on Wed, 05 Feb 2003 04:41:22 -0800
CB Of course, a major issue with --inplace is that the file will be
CB in an intermediate state if rsync is killed mid-transfer. Rsync
CB currently
2003-02-05T07:41:22 Craig Barratt:
The trick is that when --inplace is specified the block matching
algorithm (on the sender) would only match blocks at or after that
block's location (on the receiver).
... and only when the source block in question remains unchanged in
the new file?
No
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 09:17:03AM -0800, Mike Rubel wrote:
CB Of course, a major issue with --inplace is that the file will be
CB in an intermediate state if rsync is killed mid-transfer. Rsync
CB currently ensures that every file is either the original or new.
I'm curious, how
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:52:45AM -0800, Ben Escoto wrote:
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 09:17:03AM -0800, Mike Rubel wrote:
CB Of course, a major issue with --inplace is that the file will be
CB in an intermediate state if rsync is killed mid-transfer. Rsync
CB currently ensures that
Hi,
I have 2 linux machines, SOURCE and DEST on a network. I create some
snapshots of the file structure on SOURCE and these snapshots have extended
attributes. I want to copy the snapshots from SOURCE over to DEST over the
network, but I don't want to lose the information on the extended
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:53:25AM -0800, Kenny Gorman wrote:
Eric Whiting wrote:
I've learned some good things from this discussion. THanks.
Kenny, I have one concern/idea -- The original post says the 'disk is
fairly slow'. That is one bottleneck that should probably be examined a
little
Kenny Gorman wrote:
I am rsyncing 1tb of data each day. I am finding in my testing that
actually removing the target files each day then rsyncing is faster than
doing a compare of the source-target files then rsyncing over the delta
blocks. This is because we have a fast link between the
I'm using rsync 2.5.4 on my RedHat 7.3 client laptop and rsync 2.5.5
on my RedHat 8.0 server. On the client, I have a directory rpm with
5 subdirectories, out of which I only want to copy the one called SRPMS
across. I also have another directory .mozilla out of which I want to
copy across 2
On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 10:01, Eric Whiting wrote:
Kenny Gorman wrote:
[...]
I tested with a small 256M datafile. rsync -av is showing me about 200kBytes of
changes in the datafile between each snapshot. (about 1/1000th of the file has
actually changed between the hot backups) Rsync reports the
Anand Buddhdev wrote:
I'm using rsync 2.5.4 on my RedHat 7.3 client laptop and rsync 2.5.5
on my RedHat 8.0 server. On the client, I have a directory rpm with
5 subdirectories, out of which I only want to copy the one called
SRPMS
across. I also have another directory .mozilla out of which I
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 01:17:34AM -, Max Bowsher wrote:
--include .mozilla
--include .mozilla/arb/
--exclude .mozilla/arb/*
--include .mozilla/arb/kfgj0v2y.slt/
--include .mozilla/arb/kfgj0v2y.slt/bookmarks.html
--include .mozilla/arb/kfgj0v2y.slt/prefs.js
--exclude
Wayne Davison wrote:
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 01:17:34AM -, Max Bowsher wrote:
--include .mozilla
--include .mozilla/arb/
--exclude .mozilla/arb/*
--include .mozilla/arb/kfgj0v2y.slt/
--include .mozilla/arb/kfgj0v2y.slt/bookmarks.html
--include .mozilla/arb/kfgj0v2y.slt/prefs.js
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 01:58:28AM -, Max Bowsher wrote:
It would copy nothing from arb, surely?
Sorry, I meant to say that it might copy more from .mozzilla than just
arb, but a re-edit ruined that thought.
I don't think .mozilla was in rpm:
You're right, I missed that. Duh. Hopefully
hi
when i run this command in dry-run mode, its complies with the include
exclude rules perfectly (based on what it shows me; i.e. it only gives me
the stuff i have specified and not every single folder in /usr/home).
however when i run it without the -n option it, it backs up all the folders
in
Date: Wed Feb 5 18:41:53 2003
Author: paulg
Update of /data/cvs/rsync/packaging/redhat/5.0
In directory dp.samba.org:/tmp/cvs-serv14882/rsync/packaging/redhat/5.0
Modified Files:
rsync.spec rsync.spec.tmpl
Log Message:
Update packaging spec files per patch submitted by Horst von
24 matches
Mail list logo
