[Bug 10495] "skipping directory foo" (does not transfer directories by default)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10495 --- Comment #5 from Filipus Klutiero 2014-03-14 03:36:27 UTC --- I understand that --recursive will consider directories. The problem is that the example doesn't contain --recursive. I managed to get my backup working, I was just pointing out the

[Bug 10495] "skipping directory foo" (does not transfer directories by default)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10495 --- Comment #4 from Kevin Korb 2014-03-14 03:16:04 UTC --- Directories are only followed if you use -r aka --recursive. Note that in my example I did so. However, if you added -r to your example you would get any directory in the current directo

[Bug 10495] "skipping directory foo" (does not transfer directories by default)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10495 Filipus Klutiero changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug 10496] New: --itemize-changes always reports xattr changes with --xattrs --fake-super

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10496 Summary: --itemize-changes always reports xattr changes with --xattrs --fake-super Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW

[Bug 10495] "skipping directory foo" (does not transfer directories by default)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10495 --- Comment #2 from Kevin Korb 2014-03-14 00:12:53 UTC --- BTW, there is also a recursive example in the include/exclude pattern rules: > The combination of "+ */", "+ *.c", and "- *" would include all > directories and C source files but noth

[Bug 10495] "skipping directory foo" (does not transfer directories by default)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10495 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10495] New: "skipping directory foo" (does not transfer directories by default)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10495 Summary: "skipping directory foo" (does not transfer directories by default) Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severit

[Bug 10494] New: remove-source-files fails with symlinks

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10494 Summary: remove-source-files fails with symlinks Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: x64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: P5 Compo

[Bug 2294] Detect renamed files and handle by renaming instead of delete/re-send

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #20 from kevin.la...@gmail.com 2014-03-02 03:08:37 UTC --- I've been playing with the --detect-renamed patch https://git.samba.org/?p=rsync-patches.git;a=blob;f=detect-renamed.diff;h=c3e6e846eab437e56e25e2c334e292996ee84345;hb=master I c

[Bug 10475] New: Delete based upon enclosing folder

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10475 Summary: Delete based upon enclosing folder Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Compon

[Bug 10409] issue with "Number of deleted files"

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10409 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10448] Finish implementing the --ignore-case feature

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10448 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Version|3.1.0

[Bug 10451] --info=progress2 with --bwlimit doesn't give correct value

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10451 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 8416] Please include systemd service file

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8416 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10450] --info=progress2 increase %

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10450 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 8416] Please include systemd service file

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8416 --- Comment #10 from David Farning 2014-02-24 00:07:47 UTC --- I have correct the original rsync.service file. As a point of reference, both Fedora 20 [1] and Debian Sid use this rsync.service as their systemd service file. Thanks David 1- http

[Bug 8416] Please include systemd service file

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8416 --- Comment #9 from David Farning 2014-02-24 00:01:26 UTC --- Created attachment 9711 --> https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=9711 rsync.service -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are r

[Bug 10450] --info=progress2 increase %

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10450 --- Comment #4 from Vania Toperich 2014-02-16 09:34:13 UTC --- Yes it works perfectly. Thanks a lot.. Also speed is correct as well (it settles to correct value) Have a nice day (In reply to comment #3) > Thanks.. I will try it out. > > (In rep

[Bug 10450] --info=progress2 increase %

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10450 --- Comment #3 from Vania Toperich 2014-02-16 08:46:21 UTC --- Thanks.. I will try it out. (In reply to comment #1) > Created attachment 9689 [details] > suggested patch > > I actually posted about the same a while back on the list, but was't su

[Bug 10450] --info=progress2 increase %

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10450 --- Comment #2 from Anish Shankar 2014-02-16 04:22:04 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) >Percentage get's updated only after file has been transferred to destination. >From what I noticed as well as looking the code, I think the percentage get's up

[Bug 10450] --info=progress2 increase %

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10450 --- Comment #1 from Anish Shankar 2014-02-16 04:18:39 UTC --- Created attachment 9689 --> https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=9689 suggested patch I actually posted about the same a while back on the list, but was't sure if it was expe

[Bug 10451] New: --info=progress2 with --bwlimit doesn't give correct value

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10451 Summary: --info=progress2 with --bwlimit doesn't give correct value Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal

[Bug 10450] New: --info=progress2 increase %

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10450 Summary: --info=progress2 increase % Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core

[Bug 10449] New: Allow testing of supported parameter(s)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10449 Summary: Allow testing of supported parameter(s) Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 C

[Bug 10448] New: Please include the --ignore-case patch by default

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10448 Summary: Please include the --ignore-case patch by default Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5

[Bug 10445] flag to suppress link_stat error messages

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10445 michele changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10445] New: flag to suppress link_stat error messages

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10445 Summary: flag to suppress link_stat error messages Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5

[Bug 10357] make check fails for xattr tests

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 --- Comment #8 from Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2014-02-04 21:45:23 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > With 'fakeroot' package installed, all tests with 3.1.1pre1 on the gentoo box > Gentoo pass. Please keep the bug open until I verify it on on other s

[Bug 10357] make check fails for xattr tests

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 --- Comment #7 from Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2014-02-02 12:38:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > Nothing fails here, so any progress would have to come from you. I supplied the relevant information in comment #3. I would be happy if you could pr

[Bug 10409] issue with "Number of deleted files"

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10409 --- Comment #1 from Kevin Korb 2014-01-31 16:05:33 UTC --- ssh user@1.0.0.0 /opt/alct/bin/rsync --version If the remote version isn't also 3.1.0 then it does not have the #files deleted feature in --stats. If rsync sees an older version on the re

[Bug 10409] New: issue with "Number of deleted files"

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10409 Summary: issue with "Number of deleted files" Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: Solaris Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Compo

[Bug 10357] make check fails for xattr tests

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 --- Comment #6 from Wayne Davison 2014-01-30 17:26:40 UTC --- I would also suggest trying rsync 3.1.1pre1, since the re-ordering of the chown & xattr args may affect the test. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=ema

[Bug 10357] make check fails for xattr tests

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 --- Comment #5 from Wayne Davison 2014-01-30 17:23:06 UTC --- Nothing fails here, so any progress would have to come from you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: -

[Bug 10357] make check fails for xattr tests

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mlus...@redhat.com --- Comment #4

[Bug 10405] Feature request: Add support for pre/post cmds for the rsync client

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10405 --- Comment #1 from Kevin Korb 2014-01-29 21:57:03 UTC --- Personally, I wouldn't have any use for the processing of the output part but a pre and post command to create and destroy lvm2 snapshots would be useful. Especially in keeping rsync from

[Bug 10405] New: Feature request: Add support for pre/post cmds for the rsync client

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10405 Summary: Feature request: Add support for pre/post cmds for the rsync client Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severit

[Bug 9864] Allow permanent compression of destination files

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9864 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10389] New: Sort the output of --help into alphabetical order

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10389 Summary: Sort the output of --help into alphabetical order Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5

[Bug 10380] Non-Nested Folder Optimisation

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10380 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Korb 2014-01-20 14:03:40 UTC --- That is an HFS+ "feature". It is why Apple's Time Machine backup system works faster than rsync. They do utilize this optimization but it would only work on HFS+. -- Configure bugmail:

[Bug 10334] rsync doesn't log hardlink-copies using --link-dest

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10334 --- Comment #5 from Andreas 2014-01-20 12:59:33 UTC --- Thank you very much for your support! -ii results much more output as I wanted to, but it seems that there is no better way. Would be a nice fix in further versions. -- Configure bugmail: h

[Bug 9864] Allow permanent compression of destination files

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9864 Haravikk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|WONTFIX

[Bug 10379] rsync metadata files

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10379 --- Comment #2 from Haravikk 2014-01-20 12:42:32 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) That sounds great actually; how does it work with regards to where the DB is stored, you just specify a path to it? Does it create one for the sender and receiver or

[Bug 10380] Non-Nested Folder Optimisation

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10380 --- Comment #2 from Haravikk 2014-01-20 12:40:05 UTC --- Are you sure? It seems to update the folder mtime on HFS+ at least, but if it doesn't work on other file systems then yeah you're right, maybe not worth it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bu

[Bug 10372] rsync 3.10 error in protocol data stream while rsync 3.0.9 runs through

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10372 --- Comment #2 from Harvey 2014-01-20 09:18:58 UTC --- I added --msgs2stderr --debug=all5 to my command line and here is the result... After a lot of chunk[xxx] entries this is the end of the output: chunk[245] of size 115440 at 28282800 offset=2

[Bug 9864] Allow permanent compression of destination files

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9864 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10290] Regression since 3.0.9: send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10290 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10354] link-by-hash-autodir - use an automatically determined directory to collect the hash-hardlinks

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10354 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10353] link-by-hash collision detection

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10353 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10352] link-by-hash hardlink-collection maintenance mode

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10352 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement --- Comment #1 from Wayne Davi

[Bug 10350] rsync does not remove temporary files if interrupted (e.g. ctrl-C)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10350 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10372] rsync 3.10 error in protocol data stream while rsync 3.0.9 runs through

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10372 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from Wayne Davison

[Bug 10379] rsync metadata files

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10379 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10380] Non-Nested Folder Optimisation

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10380 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10381] --acls and --xattrs clash with --delete-missing-args

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10381 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 5124] Parallelize the rsync run using multiple threads and/or connections

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5124 --- Comment #5 from Andrew J. Kroll 2014-01-19 03:10:35 UTC --- Actually having two or three TCP streams at the same time has proven to be faster, because it can scan ahead. It is proven that if you download one large file, while downloading several

[Bug 10381] --acls and --xattrs clash with --delete-missing-args

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10381 --- Comment #1 from Bo Lindbergh 2014-01-15 11:10:04 UTC --- Created attachment 9595 --> https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=9595 Don't try to get ACLs or xattrs for missing files when --delete-missing-args is in effect. -- Configure

[Bug 10381] New: --acls and --xattrs clash with --delete-missing-args

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10381 Summary: --acls and --xattrs clash with --delete-missing-args Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5

[Bug 5124] Parallelize the rsync run using multiple threads and/or connections

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5124 --- Comment #4 from Haravikk 2014-01-14 17:40:22 UTC --- I see this is quite old, and to be honest I'm not completely familiar with rsync's implementation, but more rsync performance is of benefit to everyone so I thought I'd chip in my thoughts. W

[Bug 10380] New: Non-Nested Folder Optimisation

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10380 Summary: Non-Nested Folder Optimisation Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component:

[Bug 10379] New: rsync metadata files

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10379 Summary: rsync metadata files Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: core

[Bug 10290] Regression since 3.0.9: send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10290 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xose.vazq...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from

[Bug 10364] send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10364 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10363] rsync fails to transfer data

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10363 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10372] New: rsync 3.10 error in protocol data stream while rsync 3.0.9 runs through

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10372 Summary: rsync 3.10 error in protocol data stream while rsync 3.0.9 runs through Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: x64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW S

[Bug 10364] send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10364 --- Comment #2 from Xose Vazquez Perez 2014-01-09 11:08:42 UTC --- It also happens with 3.1.0 ( rsync-3.1.0-2.fc20.x86_64 ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---

[Bug 10364] send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10364 --- Comment #1 from Xose Vazquez Perez 2014-01-08 17:00:12 UTC --- Fedora bug: http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1050081 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail becaus

[Bug 10364] New: send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10364 Summary: send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed. Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5

[Bug 10363] rsync fails to transfer data

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10363 --- Comment #1 from Paul Slootman 2014-01-08 16:55:44 UTC --- The clue is in the error message: ksh: rsync: not found As you apparently haven't installed rsync in a standard $PATH location (as you specify the path to rsync locally), how do yo

[Bug 10363] New: rsync fails to transfer data

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10363 Summary: rsync fails to transfer data Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: Sparc OS/Version: Solaris Status: NEW Severity: critical Priority: P5 Component

[Bug 2294] Detect renamed files and handle by renaming instead of delete/re-send

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2294 --- Comment #19 from Norman Freudenberg 2014-01-04 22:56:00 UTC --- Hey as far I found out there are two patches which still note made it into the last official release? They are still buggy? Why didn't it made it to an official release? 9 Years

[Bug 10357] make check fails for xattr tests

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 --- Comment #3 from Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2014-01-03 11:18:52 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > The latest rsync is 3.1.0. I have run "make check" of 3.0.9 on REL6 without > issue, so perhaps you have patches that have broken something? I was

[Bug 10357] make check fails for xattr tests

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Wayne Davison

[Bug 10357] make check fails for xattr tests

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 --- Comment #1 from Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) 2014-01-02 12:22:55 UTC --- Downstream bug report: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032637 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving

[Bug 10357] New: make check fails for xattr tests

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10357 Summary: make check fails for xattr tests Product: rsync Version: 3.0.9 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: co

[Bug 10081] Multiple rsync instances conflict

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10081 --- Comment #1 from Dmitry Yu Okunev 2014-01-02 11:01:10 UTC --- I can write a patch. Is this required? I can make my modification to be optional, if this required. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ---

[Bug 3653] Reduce the need for the "vanished files" warning

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3653 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10356] Include rsync-no-vanished support script

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10356 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 3653] Reduce the need for the "vanished files" warning

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3653 --- Comment #25 from jakob...@gmail.com 2014-01-01 15:04:58 UTC --- What remains to be done is to make the the rsync-no-vanished script accessible to users. I created bug 10356 about including it in the tarball. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzil

[Bug 10356] New: Include rsync-no-vanished support script

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10356 Summary: Include rsync-no-vanished support script Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: minor Priority: P5 Compon

[Bug 10290] Regression since 3.0.9: send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10290 --- Comment #5 from Moritz Bunkus 2013-12-31 12:26:56 UTC --- Unfortunately I haven't been able to narrow down the test case. I've spent the last couple of days trying to make it as small as possible. The bug occurs when I rsync a whole dirvish ho

[Bug 10354] New: link-by-hash-autodir - use an automatically determined directory to collect the hash-hardlinks

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10354 Summary: link-by-hash-autodir - use an automatically determined directory to collect the hash-hardlinks Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All St

[Bug 10353] New: link-by-hash collision detection

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10353 Summary: link-by-hash collision detection Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: co

[Bug 10352] New: link-by-hash hardlink-collection maintenance mode

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10352 Summary: link-by-hash hardlink-collection maintenance mode Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5

[Bug 10351] New: link-by-hash no-copy initialization

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10351 Summary: link-by-hash no-copy initialization Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component:

[Bug 10350] New: rsync does not remove temporary files if interrupted (e.g. ctrl-C)

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10350 Summary: rsync does not remove temporary files if interrupted (e.g. ctrl-C) Product: rsync Version: 3.1.0 Platform: x64 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severi

[Bug 8456] improve --link-dest bahaviour

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8456 --- Comment #8 from Toralf Förster 2013-12-27 13:06:00 UTC --- well - so seems to be solved ? :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact

[Bug 10322] Slow Performance over Network rsync

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10322 --- Comment #17 from roland 2013-12-26 10:41:49 UTC --- seems you are right: http://victorwyee.com/cmd/solving-rsync-hangs-in-cygwin-via-script-or-recompiling/ ..."I still encounter the occasional hang with this rsync 3.1.0 with socketpairs – but n

[Bug 10290] Regression since 3.0.9: send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10290 --- Comment #4 from Moritz Bunkus 2013-12-26 08:41:53 UTC --- Before I posted this bug I had already tried to narrow the test down to a smaller subset of files. I hadn't been successful back then, but as each run took quite a lot of hours I hadn't

[Bug 10322] Slow Performance over Network rsync

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10322 --- Comment #16 from Wayne Davison 2013-12-26 00:39:28 UTC --- This was never really a bugfix, but instead of kluge due to defects in cygwin -- one that does not appear to be needed anymore. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userp

[Bug 5109] poor performance on large drives with big bandwidth

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5109 --- Comment #6 from roland 2013-12-25 23:45:04 UTC --- besides the fact that this bug is quite old and could perhaps be closed, i recommend retesting with latest rsync on latest cygwin. performance is much better with that -- Configure bugmail: ht

[Bug 8456] improve --link-dest bahaviour

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8456 --- Comment #7 from Wayne Davison 2013-12-25 23:25:53 UTC --- The latest rsync will now look into link-dest dirs even for files that exist in the destination directory hierarchy. It still requires all preserved attributes to match for the link to o

[Bug 9560] drop-cache option

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9560 --- Comment #4 from Wayne Davison 2013-12-25 23:15:46 UTC --- > nocache rsync -aiv --rsync-patch='nocache rsync' some-host:/src/ /dest/ That was supposed to be --rsync-path=... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=em

[Bug 9560] drop-cache option

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9560 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug 10322] Slow Performance over Network rsync

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10322 --- Comment #15 from roland 2013-12-25 22:53:30 UTC --- i`m not sure if it`s good to revert a "bugfix" - wouldn`t it be possibly better to add skipping usage of socketpair() as an cygwin specific commandline option? so that would make it easier to

[Bug 10290] Regression since 3.0.9: send_xattr_request: Assertion `f_out >= 0' failed

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10290 --- Comment #3 from Wayne Davison 2013-12-25 22:30:11 UTC --- If you can help with a test case that can reproduce this bug, it would help me to debug it. Otherwise I may just turn off this hard-linked optimization so that the copying at least does

[Bug 10322] Slow Performance over Network rsync

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10322 --- Comment #14 from Wayne Davison 2013-12-25 22:24:02 UTC --- I have verified that restoring the use of socketpair() (instead of pipe()) is indeed faster under cygwin. I have also seen reports of fewer hangs in the most modern cygwin libs (and a

[Bug 10322] Slow Performance over Network rsync

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10322 --- Comment #13 from roland 2013-12-25 20:58:09 UTC --- since this bugreport is about local->local rsync (from the view of rsync copying to //path this is a local transfer) i assume this is some cygwin related issue regarging how rsync handles loca

[Bug 8740] compress ("-z") should be ignored if both src and dst are local

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8740 roland changed: What|Removed |Added CC||devz...@web.de --- Comment #2 from roland 2013-12

[Bug 9107] rsync auto rename .dat files to .exe

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9107 --- Comment #1 from roland 2013-12-25 20:42:22 UTC --- please provide the output of a directory listing on the source and on the destination, it`s hard to believe that rsync renames files that way on transfer. are you sure you have not been misled

[Bug 7865] files or dirs with more than 16 ACLs are not rsynced correctly

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7865 --- Comment #7 from Wayne Davison 2013-12-25 18:18:40 UTC --- While you didn't output errno after the failing acl() call, it appears that it returns 22 (EINVAL), which means that your OS doesn't like the args to that call. I googled a bit and saw s

<    3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   >