rsync - Jun 2006 - DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3828] New: ACLs are not supported on this client

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828

           Summary: ACLs are not supported on this client
           Product: rsync
           Version: 2.6.8
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: core
        AssignedTo: wayned@samba.org
        ReportedBy: marc@perkel.com
         QAContact: rsync-qa@samba.org


I'm using Fedora Core 5 and I started getting these messages.

rsync: ACLs are not supported on this client
rsync error: syntax or usage error (code 1) at main.c(1231) [client=2.6.8]

Is FC5 compiled without ACL support?


-- 
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.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828


wayned@samba.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID




------- Comment #1 from wayned@samba.org  2006-06-11 10:28 MST -------
That warning means that rsync was patched with ACL support but not configured
with it enabled.  You'll need to contact whomever packaged it, since
they're
the only ones that can change the package (i.e. file a bug with the Fedora
folks).


-- 
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.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828





------- Comment #2 from hashproduct+rsync@gmail.com  2006-06-11 11:53 MST
-------
I am using FC5, and I made my own RPMS of rsync patched and configured for ACL
support.  They are linked on this page:
    http://www.kepreon.com/~matt/myrsync/index.html
And they are in this Yum repository:
    http://www.kepreon.com/~matt/rpm/


-- 
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.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828





------- Comment #3 from agbuggy923@tagmall.com  2006-08-02 18:10 MST -------
I've noticed this as well.  The FC5 RPM appears to have rsync with the ACL
patch enabled.  But when I built rsync from source (with --with-acl-support),
configure presumes that ACL support is not available on this platform.

I've yet to dig into this (I'd likely start with the FC5 source RPM, but
I'm
hoping that someone will save me the trouble).

But I wanted you to know: you're not the only person to experience this.


-- 
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.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828


agbuggy923@tagmall.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |agbuggy923@tagmall.com




------- Comment #4 from agbuggy923@tagmall.com  2006-08-02 18:18 MST -------
I'd a second thought on this.  FC5 *does* support ACLs.  So I believe that
this
actually is a bug in configure, even if someone "fixed" this for the
FC5 RPM.

BTW, I originally tried building on CentOS4.3 and found the same problem.


-- 
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.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828





------- Comment #5 from agbuggy923@tagmall.com  2006-08-02 20:21 MST -------
I've subsequently added the xattrs.diff patch.  I then build with options:
--enable-acl-support --enable-xattr-support.

After I did the necessary manual intervention (moving some files into the libs
directory), this did result in an rsync on both CentOS 4.3 and Fedora Core 5
which at least recognized the -A option.

So perhaps it's not a bug if Fedora/CentOS ACLs require xattr support
(which,
thinking about it, does make sense to me).

So this would be my 3rd thought on the subject?


-- 
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.

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3828





------- Comment #6 from hashproduct+rsync@gmail.com  2006-08-10 13:04 MST
-------
The --with-acl-support option was changed to --enable-acl-support in 2.6.7, and
--with-acl-support now has no effect.  So if you gave --with-acl-support to
rsync 2.6.8, you shouldn't expect it to configure for ACLs.

ACLs are usually implemented using extended attributes, but rsync shouldn't
need xattrs.diff to make use of the system's ACL library, which handles the
details of accessing the extended attributes.  I patched rsync 2.6.8 with
acls.diff and configured with --enable-acl-support, and it correctly preserved
ACLs when given -A.  Try this, and if it doesn't work for you, then we
should
be concerned.

By the way: you should give the -p1 option to patch so that it obeys the
subdirectories specified in acls.diff.  Then, no "manual intervention"
will be
necessary.

If the rsync on the other machine is patched but not configured for ACLs, rsync
gives a message like this:
rsync: ACLs are not supported on this server
rsync error: syntax or usage error (code 1) at main.c(1231) [server=2.6.8]
rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (0 bytes received so far) [sender]
rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at io.c(453)
[sender=2.6.9cvs]


-- 
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.