FW: [rdiff-backup-users] Debian debs with patch fix for #355178

Hello !
for the moment i have no suitable debian system for testing around, but this one (see below) is an important bugfixed version of librsync and also rdiff-backup, countaining a patch which fixes a >4gb file problem.
maybe some candidate for 0.9 !? (needs testing, though)
for details, also see https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1439412&gr...
librsync folks still didn`t do a new librsync release because the maintainers seem to have more important to do with their other projects ;)
regards roland
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Faheem Mitha faheem@email.unc.edu Gesendet: 10.11.06 20:10:57 An: rdiff-backup-users@nongnu.org Betreff: [rdiff-backup-users] Debian debs with patch fix for #355178
Hi everyone,
I just ran into Debian bug #355178, reported by Dean Gaudet. See http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=355178, which has links to a corresponding bug report on sourceforge. I imagine some/all people here are already aware of this bug, though.
This was with a 4.2 Gig Zope Data.fs database file. I ignored it for a bit hoping it would go away. It didn't, but I was relieved to learn that this was a known bug with a patch.
I spent quite a lot of time yesterday, patching librsync and rebuilding rdiff-backup against it.
You can get the librsync and rdiff-backup debs (for sarge) from
deb http://dulci.org/~faheem/debian/ sarge main contrib non-free deb-src http://dulci.org/~faheem/debian/ sarge main contrib non-free
As expected, it made the problem go away.
NB. If anyone is considering setting up an apt repository, consider using reprepro (http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/286). It makes the process quite easy.
Does anyone know any friendly Debian developers would could be persuaded to do NMUs of librsync and rdiff-backup? It would be a good thing if this fix could go in for etch.
I also have a question for Dean Gaudet. Since you are the only one apparently committing now to rdiff-backup (at least in the last few months), do you know if there are any plans to put out a new release in the near future with fixes?
Faheem.
rdiff-backup-users mailing list at rdiff-backup-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rdiff-backup-users Wiki URL: http://rdiff-backup.solutionsfirst.com.au/index.php/RdiffBackupWiki
_____________________________________________________________________ Der WEB.DE SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen! http://smartsurfer.web.de/?mc=100071&distributionid=000000000066

* devzero@web.de devzero@web.de [20061110 22:50]:
for the moment i have no suitable debian system for testing around, but this one (see below) is an important bugfixed version of librsync and also rdiff-backup, countaining a patch which fixes a >4gb file problem.
maybe some candidate for 0.9 !? (needs testing, though)
for details, also see https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1439412&gr...
librsync folks still didn`t do a new librsync release because the maintainers seem to have more important to do with their other projects ;)
If the problem really still exists I'd like to see it fixed in the main Debian package as well, so the upcoming Debian release (etch) does not suffer from a serious problem in librsync and related packages.
I'm currently running out of time, can anyone of you test it and send a bugreport against the package with accurate severity level?
thanks && regards, -mika-

* Michael Prokop mika@grml.org [20061114 13:24]:
- devzero@web.de devzero@web.de [20061110 22:50]:
[librsync: problems with >4gb files]
If the problem really still exists I'd like to see it fixed in the main Debian package as well, so the upcoming Debian release (etch) does not suffer from a serious problem in librsync and related packages.
I'm currently running out of time, can anyone of you test it and send a bugreport against the package with accurate severity level?
formorer was so kind to prepare a NMU package. Before uploading the package to the Debian pool I tried to verify the described behaviour but wasn't able to reproduce it. Running rdiff-backup on a >4GB file did not cause any problems here.
I sent a f'up to #355178 (see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=355178 for details) and requested the steps how to reproduce the problem.
JFYI
regards, -mika-
Teilnehmer (2)
-
devzero@web.de
-
Michael Prokop