[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2005/05/13]
On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 06:16:15AM -0500, Peter da Silva wrote: > You see, when one makes incompatible changes in the rsync protocol, > one is normally expected to change the version number so one doesn't > use it with normal rsync and then discover that ones backup consists > almost entirely of empty files. > > Because how rsyncx "handles" resource forks and finder info is to > send each file three times with the same name and inode number, > and the receiving rsyncx goes "oh, I already have this, this must > be the resource fork". It turns out that normal rsync is entirely > happy to accept the same file multiple times and write over the > already synced file with its finder info and then its usually empty > resource fork. I just uploaded a text file with a resource fork from my Mac using rsyncx to my Debian machine. It went across fine with no resource fork. rsyncx is 2.1 (2.6.0 protocol 27) and on the Debian side its 2.6.4 protocol 29. Maybe you had an old version of rsync on one side or the other. -- Michael G Schwern schwern@xxxxx.xxx http://www.pobox.com/~schwern Ahh email, my old friend. Do you know that revenge is a dish that is best served cold? And it is very cold on the Internet!There's stuff above here
Generated at 23:00 on 18 May 2005 by mariachi 0.52