sorry, i forgot to mention that both client and server are running MacOS 10.4
(client is 10.4.8 and server is 10.4.11) and both source and destination are
HFS+ Journaled, both machines are G5 PowerPC xserves.
Partition scheme on both source volume and destination volume is Apple
Partition Map. Al
to preserve Mac OS X ACL's and extended attributes you have to be rsyncing to
another Mac or at least a volume formatted with HFS+. If your rsync server is
not a Mac and the HFS+ partition does not have ACL's turned on then the ACL's
and extended attributes won't be copied.
David.
- Origi
There are three areas of fundamental incompatibility (that I am aware of)
Basic File Permissions: Unix has rwx for owner/group/world, Windows has
Hidden/System/Read-Only/Archive. NTFS has ACLs
(The above is an oversimplification, and things can be done so it works
well enough for what is necessa
Have a functional rsync 3.0.6 server but am having troubles preserving
permissions from source to destination.
On server, rsyncd.conf looks like this (modules are defined but not listed
below):
cat /etc/rsyncd.conf
secrets file = /etc/rsyncd.secrets
read only = no
list = yes
uid = root
gid = whe
Will someone please tell me where to go, and how to get there to get rsync
running to mounted windows shares or mounted NTFS volumes? I'm doing OK with
rsync-ing to EXT3 mounted volumes but the others still perplex me.
I look forward to hearing from you,
Dale
--
Please use reply-all for most repl
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:26:32PM -0400, Ian! D. Allen wrote:
> These two small changes enable 3.0.6 to compile and link on AIX 3.2:
> #if defined(ENOTSUP)
[...]
> #else
> errno = EINVAL;
I think using ENOSYS would be better than EINVAL there. Does that work?
BTW, using -u with d
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 15:59 +0300, Amir Rapson wrote:
> Running rsync with --whole-file yields poorer performance results than
> a simple "cp".
> Looking at the code - it looks like "copy_file" isn't really called
> when I add the --whole-file flag. The regular "receive_data" is doing
> the copy.
Hi,
Running rsync with --whole-file yields poorer performance results than a
simple "cp".
Looking at the code - it looks like "copy_file" isn't really called when I
add the --whole-file flag. The regular "receive_data" is doing the copy.
Anyone encountered this? No other special flags (rsync --who
Hi,
I have a file that changes slightly in size every day and has the timestamp
appended to it.. for example on the 14th may:
MybackedUpFileBlabla_200905140219.bak
This is transferred by rsync to another server.
The next day that file is deleted and substituted by a new file on the
sender.. the n
