Inadequate error checking in rsync 2.5.5

jw schultz jw at
Tue Sep 16 14:46:25 EST 2003

On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 01:59:37PM -0700, jw schultz wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 01:41:51PM -0700, David Norwood wrote:
> > > > Okay, with this patch I now get error messages, but it still creates
> > null
> > > > filled output files.  I guess that is what you meant by "the behavior is
> > the
> > > > same".
> > 
> > > That is correct.  At the point in which we detect the
> > > problem there isn't anything we can do to produce
> > > good files.  The most i can see our being able to do is to
> > > warn you that it has happened.
> > 
> > I understand that there is no chance of getting good files in this case.  My
> > point is that the null filled files are undesireable.  They have the right
> > size and timestamp, so rsync won't replace them on subsequent runs.  Can
> > rsync remove these files after the error is detected?
> IFF we could be sure of distinguishing between the access
> control issue of SMB and NFS, and truncation and mandatory
> locking i'd consider it.
> The one thing that does occur to me as possibly acceptable
> would be to mess with the mod_time.  Either set it to NOW or
> perhaps epoch+1.

Can't do anything about the date.  The problem is detected
on the sender but it is the receiver that sets the timestamp.
There isn't a way to propagate the error to the receiver.

Patch is committed.

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

		Remember Cernan and Schmitt

More information about the rsync mailing list