This bug was fixed in the package rsync - 3.2.2-2ubuntu1
---
rsync (3.2.2-2ubuntu1) groovy; urgency=medium
* Merge with Debian unstable (LP: #1888685). Remaining changes:
- d/t/control, d/t/upstream-tests: Make autopkgtests cross-test-friendly
rsync (3.2.2-2) unstable; urgency=
Oh, right, sorry for overlooking that and thanks for the details!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1888685
Title:
rsync fails after installing level 3.2.1
To manage notifications about
Hi Seb, as far as I understood Cliff it only started to occur with version
3.2.1 in Groovy.
And after we found the root cause that is now confirmed, 3.2.1 has:
ProtectSystem=full
ProtectHome=on
PrivateDevices=on
NoNewPrivileges=on
But the version in Focal doesn't have that and thereby is fine with
@Christian, sounds like a fix probably worth SRUing to the LTS?
** Changed in: rsync (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => High
** Changed in: rsync (Ubuntu)
Status: Triaged => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed t
This won't auto-sync as there is Delta.
This MP is up to merge the latest version from Debian.
=>
https://code.launchpad.net/~paelzer/ubuntu/+source/rsync/+git/rsync/+merge/388554
** Tags added: server-next
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
My resync is working fine again. Thanks for your attention to this bug-
report.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1888685
Title:
rsync fails after installing level 3.2.1
To manage noti
OK, so the directory being in /home is the culprit, I could reproduce
the issue and found where the problem is. At some point rsync added
ProtectHome=on
option to its service file, /lib/systemd/system/rsync.service. This has been
reverted in upstream git at [1] as it's too restrictive. The f
Appears to me is that failure criteria is if the directory being
rsync'ed is off of my home it will fail. Hard to believe I'm the only
one seeing this. Again this 20.10 system was functioning normally until
7/18 when 3.2.1 was installed.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a m
Have a /etc/rsyncd.conf that moves data from path = /mnt/testrsync
directory on my desktop to my laptop and it works. Changing the
/etc/rsyncd.conf to path = /home/cliff/Bin fails with a chroot failure
(unable to find the path). Copied the /mnt to my home directory (cp -r
/mnt ./) so the only dif
Hi Cliff,
This is odd, but if I understand correctly you have a setup that
triggers the problem and a slightly different setup that does not, on
the same system. This means we are in a good position already. I'd
follow Christian's suggestion and make them even more and more similar
until you can s
No differences between /home/cliff/Bin and /mnt/testrsync (0755) both
owned by cliff:cliff. In building my test cast wanted to duplicated the
target directories as much as I could.
No I use the systemctl start/stop rsync so the answer is the daemon is
running under root.
--
You received this bu
Maybe permission differences of the path to /home/cliff/Bin vs
/mnt/testrsync
Did you start the daemon like I did as root or under a different user?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/18886
This doesn't seem right to me. Changed the path = Bin and the call to
rsync to use the -R option which I think is to use relative path. Still
fails on chroot but the rsyncd.log has the following;
2020/07/29 08:52:17 [10277] rsync allowed access on module Bin_dir from UNKNOWN
(192.168.1.159)
202
Stumped to what to do next. Have two test cases, one works, one fails
with chroot error. Here is the rsyncd.conf that workds;
cat << EOF > /etc/rsyncd.conf
log file = /var/log/rsyncd.log
pid file = /var/run/rsyncd.pid
lock file = /var/run/rsync.lock
[test_dir]
path = /mnt/testrsync
comment = Te
Couldn't figure out how to make your example run on my 20.10 (or even
20.04) server systems. Using your example took apart my server/client
and made a simple case (using the /mnt/synctest directories) which runs
when the server is either 20.04 or 20.10. Will start looking at what to
add to make i
@Cliff
- if you run the above simplified case does it work for you?
- if it does, could you try making it closer and closer to your setup until
you've identified what
makes it break?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Thanks Cliff!
Note: the server question you wondered would have been the details how exactly
(commands&config( you do "syncd is enabled and started at boot with the
rsyncd.conf". Because in that might lay the details we need.
I was setting up a server on my own aligned to your config.
The follow
Don't understand the server question. The syncd is enabled and started
at boot with the rsyncd.conf in /etc, rsyncd.srct in /etc and rsync in
/etc/default. The client start the rsync process with a cron job with
the attached script.
** Attachment added: "Resync.sh"
https://bugs.launchpad.net
Thanks, with that config (or a subset thereof) how do you run your
server (if it is anything more than sshd or such) and your client (the
actual rsync call)?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bu
Christian, had this sync setup over many releases of Ubuntu without
issue. Have the syncd running on 20.10 and the client on 20.04. After
the install of 20.10 sync ran OK until the 3.2.1 level was installed.
Added the current syncd.conf (haven't made changes to this file for
several releases of U
Hi Cliff and thank you for the report.
Hmm, neither the later 3.2.2 nor the yet unreleased 3.2.3 mention any fix in
that regard.
https://download.samba.org/pub/rsync/NEWS#3.2.2
I guess we'd be down to bisecting for the offending change or something like it.
As-is I'm not seeing the issue when rs
21 matches
Mail list logo
