am I missing something, or are permissions always preserved?

jw schultz jw at
Mon Jan 13 21:16:11 EST 2003

On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 02:38:29PM -0600, Dave Dykstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 11:00:58AM -0800, Ben wrote:
> > Well that's annoying. I've tried changing the encoding of this
> > attempt... maybe it'll get through this time.
> Yes, it came through better this time.
> > As a rule of thumb, I think silent errors a very bad idea. It means
> > things might not be behaving like you expect, but you have no idea. In
> > general, rsync's current behavior is correct. In my case niche case, it
> > doesn't work. I think the proper solution is to change rsync's behavior,
> > not reduce the errors it produces.
> Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if it only looked for certain error codes from
> the failed chmod.  The nice thing about ignoring errors is that it's one
> less thing for users to have to learn and understand.
> Any other opinions?

First, identify the errno.  Is it the same for cygwin and
samba mounts?  Then do the treatment for that errno(s) only.

As far as i can tell except where the filesystem doesn't
support chmod an error chmoding here is insane.  We just
created the file.

I'd rather kick out a warning on the first one and then
ignore.  That warns the user that something isn't quite
right without flooding the log.

Dave, see my post a litter earlier in the thread for a
possible code change.

> > If it comes through, take a look at the patch. I think I did a decent
> > job of updating the docs so that purpose of the new flag is clear.
> At a minimum I think the option is too limited.  I'd want a solution
> that would work for both the fixed permission samba case and the vfat
> filesystem under Linux case.  In particular, I don't see it skipping
> the fchmod in do_mkstemp.  I don't know, maybe that's the only addition
> that would be needed.

	J.W. Schultz            Pegasystems Technologies
	email address:		jw at

		Remember Cernan and Schmitt

More information about the rsync mailing list