Patching?

[jw schultz]

On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 09:51:35AM -0700, Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 07, 2003 at 03:34:32PM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
> > I'm thinking the protocol version MIN would be good to add, it might
> > not help for this cycle but would in future.  This also ties in with
> > something i suggested earlier for the sake of testing, a --protocol
> > option to explicitly force a downgrade.
> 
> I agree with both ideas, and have worked up a patch (though the new
> option is, as yet, undocumented):
> 
>     http://www.blorf.net/rsync-protocol.patch
> 
> I'll go ahead and check this in soon, since I can't see any downside to
> doing this.
> 
> Note that this change should help out with this cycle, since this change
> allows someone to just bump down the PROTOCOL_VERSION in rsync.h and the
> code will properly skip all the new-protocol extensions.  It will also
> give us a work-around for talking to a pre-release server that someone
> might have left lying around, unsupported.  E.g., if the remote system
> says it supports protocol 27, but it's a CVS version that doesn't really
> support all of 27, you can use the new "--protocol=26" option to force
> the two to talk using an earlier protocol version.

I see you committed it. Good.  It deserves a mention in
NEWS.  I'm less certain about the manpage.

-- 
________________________________________________________________
	J.W. Schultz            Pegasystems Technologies
	email address:		jw at pegasys.ws

		Remember Cernan and Schmitt