--copy-unsafe-links work badly

[Martin Pool]

I realized after I wrote that it was tridge's 1.53 patch, as you say.
Sorry if it I sounded short.

> I'm sorry, but I've never looked at that part of the code so I don't have
> any expertise to contribute.  A quick look at it makes me also wonder why
> that's depth=0.  CVS shows it was that way ever since Tridge put in the
> option in util.c version 1.53, before my time as maintainer.

It seems to work properly for downloads from a daemon, but it's pretty
questionable in other cases.

The way Vladimír Michl expected the option to work seems reasonable to
me: links are considered "unsafe" if their target is not (provably)
within the path originally specified, this is basically as in
unsafe-byname.test.

Unless somebody can think of a way this is insecure, I think I will
change it to be so in 2.6 and update the documentation.

> I'm also sorry that I've been out of touch on rsync for 2 weeks;

No problem at all.

-- 
Martin