[Bug 3168] --min-size cores in 2.6.5 and is completely missing in 2.6.6

samba-bugs at samba.org samba-bugs at samba.org
Sun Oct 16 15:31:24 GMT 2005


------- Additional Comments From foner-rsync-bugzilla at media.mit.edu  2005-10-16 08:31 -------
I saw the CVS checkin comments a couple days ago and just looked at them---thanks!

(One tiny nit---you might want to mention in the manual that the +1/-1 are
explicitly for avoiding fenceposts when using min/max-size.  This -seems-
obvious, but ya never know.)

I'm not sure if I should open a bug report in Ubuntu Breezy to get them to apply
pressure upstream to get either the current CVS or 2.6.7, when it's released (is
there an estimate?).  Ordinarily I'd just wait, but since Ubuntu shipped a
-broken- Debianized (and soon-to-be-incompatible) version of this, it might be
nice if Ubuntu and/or their upstream pushed out a newer version relatively soon.
 If you have any ideas (or would like to do the pushing yourself), let me know.

[I actually just downloaded the latest nightly 'cause I needed, in addition to
the +1/-1 logic, the fix to hardlinking and devices that was theoretically
installed in April but was fixed again in late July---it just bit me and I spent
an hour figuring out what was going on & working up a test case to send you, and
-then- discovered from the NEWS file in CVS that you'd fixed it 10 weeks ago...
:) Is there a regression test to make sure this doesn't get broken again?  I've
currently doing a long tetst to see if there are still problems in the
hardlinking code & will send mail or open a new bug report if I see anything.]

P.S.  Just for bookkeeping, should this bug be changed from "resolved invalid"
to "closed"?

Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.samba.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

More information about the rsync mailing list