Hi,
We re doing backups of all filesystems to a dedicated server using "rsync -x". Now, the latest CentOS versions (5.7/6.x) come with rsync-3.0.6 instead of rsync-2.x. That's nice but unfortunately it doesn't do the same as 2.x in certain situations.
The problem is with the -x option, which does not delete content under a mount point anymore. It was my impression that this is a bug, but I've been told it's a feature. The problem has shown up after I have added a new mount point on a server.
I've added a BZ for RedHat and also posted to the rsync list as below:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=735981
https://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2011-September/026766.html
Am I really the only one having problems with the new behaviour? It affects all user running "rsync -x". The problem only shows up after new mount points have been added to a subdirectory which is processed by rsync -x. That may be the reason why not many people relize it. Still, I don't see the logic behind the change which is why I take this here to hear what others think.
Thanks, Simon
Le jeu 08 sep 2011 08:32:20 CEST, Simon Matter a écrit:
Hi,
We re doing backups of all filesystems to a dedicated server using "rsync -x". Now, the latest CentOS versions (5.7/6.x) come with rsync-3.0.6 instead of rsync-2.x. That's nice but unfortunately it doesn't do the same as 2.x in certain situations.
The problem is with the -x option, which does not delete content under a mount point anymore. It was my impression that this is a bug, but I've been told it's a feature. The problem has shown up after I have added a new mount point on a server.
I've added a BZ for RedHat and also posted to the rsync list as below:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=735981
https://lists.samba.org/archive/rsync/2011-September/026766.html
Am I really the only one having problems with the new behaviour? It affects all user running "rsync -x". The problem only shows up after new mount points have been added to a subdirectory which is processed by rsync -x. That may be the reason why not many people relize it. Still, I don't see the logic behind the change which is why I take this here to hear what others think.
This is not the only difference between rsync-2.x and 3.x.
We are doing rsync -azX --delete-after etc... and it fails with rsync-3.
On the server (still running rsync-2), /var/log/secure shows the difference (sorry for the long lines). From a rsync-2 client, we receive : Sep 7 12:35:01 lasbHOME scponly[6166]: running: /usr/bin/rsync --server -lXogDtprz --delete --delete-after etc... From a rsync-3 client, it turns to : Sep 7 20:35:01 lasbHOME scponly[12764]: option 'e' or a related long option is not permitted for use with /usr/bin/rsync (arg was .is) Sep 7 20:35:01 lasbHOME scponly[12764]: requested command (/usr/bin/rsync --server -logDtpXrze.is --delete-after etc...) tried to use disallowed argument
As I don't have the time to make more trials, I simply downgraded to rsync-2.
Philippe Naudin wrote:
This is not the only difference between rsync-2.x and 3.x.
We are doing rsync -azX --delete-after etc... and it fails with rsync-3.
On the server (still running rsync-2), /var/log/secure shows the difference (sorry for the long lines).
From a rsync-2 client, we receive :
Sep 7 12:35:01 lasbHOME scponly[6166]: running: /usr/bin/rsync --server -lXogDtprz --delete --delete-after etc...
From a rsync-3 client, it turns to :
Sep 7 20:35:01 lasbHOME scponly[12764]: option 'e' or a related long option is not permitted for use with /usr/bin/rsync (arg was .is) Sep 7 20:35:01 lasbHOME scponly[12764]: requested command (/usr/bin/rsync --server -logDtpXrze.is --delete-after etc...) tried to use disallowed argument
google says this seems to be a problem with scponly, not rsync per se. HTH