rsync 2.5.5, "unexpected tag failures", Solaris 2.6 vs. 2.8,
"--b locking-io" workaround
Madole, Dave BGI SF
Dave.Madole at barclaysglobal.com
Thu Dec 5 22:37:00 EST 2002
In other words, it would be using --blocking-io anyway, and I want it too
use --blocking-io, so the worst the --blocking-io option would be is
redundant if the *SERVER* box was compiled with RSYNC_RSH=rsh (which, in my
case, it wasn't). The --blocking-io option can't hurt and would be the
default if the builds were consistent and should have no side-effects.
This all seems silly, given that on all the boxes the "remsh"s are just
links to the "rsh"s, but that's Solaris' silliness, not rsync's.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Dykstra [mailto:dwd at drdykstra.us]
> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 12:28 PM
> To: Madole, Dave BGI SF
> Cc: 'rsync at lists.samba.org'
> Subject: Re: rsync 2.5.5, "unexpected tag failures", Solaris 2.6 vs.
> 2.8, "--b locking-io" workaround
> The problem is in your use of "-e rsh"; --blocking-io is assumed if
> the -e value is equal to the RSYNC_RSH define which is usually "remsh"
> on solaris but maybe it isn't on solaris 2.8. The
> --blocking-io option
> is required for most versions of rsh, but it's sometimes difficult for
> rsync to know when rsh is being used. It's very confusing, I know.
> - Dave
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 10:42:19AM -0800, Madole, Dave BGI SF wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have been having a problem that seems related to
> previously reported
> > problems
> > but persists.
> > I am syncing from a 2.6 Solaris box to a 2.8 solaris box.
> All are running
> > rsync 2.5.5.
> > When I sync (commands simplified for example, always using rsh):
> > 2.8box% rsync -e rsh 2.6box:/path/path/stuff/ /path/path/newstuff/
> > i.e., the 2.6 box is the server, I get spurious, persistent
> but inconsistent
> > "unexpected tag <some number>" failures. This is,
> unfortunately, on the 2.8
> > box, the way I have to do it.
> > When I sync:
> > 2.6box% rsync -e rsh /path/path/stuff/ 2.8box:/path/path/newstuff/
> > (the 2.8box is the server), it works. But the 2.6 box
> isn't where the
> > script runs.
> > The first command ALSO works if I use the "--blocking-io" option,
> > 2.8box%rsync -e rsh 2.6box:/path/path/stuff/ /path/path/newstuff/
> > --blocking-io
> > but I'm not sure what the possible side-effects of that
> might be. (I picked
> > up from the CVS archive that there was some kind of
> relationship between a
> > "socketpair" Solaris bug and the "--blocking-io" option, so
> tried it, but
> > that seemed many versions ago).
> > I am not doing the builds myself - sysadmins are doing it. Is there
> > anything special they
> > need to do in the 2.6 build to avoid my having to use the
> > flag?
> > Thanks,
> > Dave Madole
> > --
> > To unsubscribe or change options:
> > Before posting, read:
More information about the rsync