From: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>
To: development@lists.ipfire.org
Subject: Re: rsync 3.2.0
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 16:35:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <10D1F12A-DEEC-4C23-93FD-A33CF9A919D2@ipfire.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56d13dd2-c24b-bfc4-ec5e-e32fdda6b4d4@ipfire.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2088 bytes --]
Hi,
> On 25 Jun 2020, at 16:28, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 25.06.2020 10:54, Michael Tremer wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> On 20 Jun 2020, at 16:09, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> rsync 3.2.0 is out and I just had time...
>
> In fact, I'm at 3.2.1. See below.
>
>>> In order to use the new xxhash checksum support and zstd compression,
>>> the corresponding kernel modules would need to be activated. Do we want
>>> or need these?
>>
>> You won’t need kernel modules for this. You simply need the relevant libraries.
>
> Ok. I wasn't sure. I found some 'zstd's in the rootfiles and thought we
> would need these.
>
>> I have packaged those for IPFire 3 and they are easy to build and have no further dependencies. So I would recommend to at least add zstd.
>
> I am at it.
>
>> https://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-3.x.git;a=blob;f=rsync/rsync.nm;h=528dcfc0a377bc770a45a8f88af00079eb26dc93;hb=b40cdb8c182d8b4aa05c6e23cc67118c4aa4853c
>> https://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-3.x.git;a=blob;f=zstd/zstd.nm;h=e5afd342b9ad2ae0c0f394116ef2dfddea670413;hb=8bcac5c8cda49b91fe68bef64c3ad975b80a43ca
>
> Thats exactly what I needed - thanks - I'll take a look.
>
>>
>>>
>>> For now, I disabled both with these configure options:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> --disable-xxhash \
>>> --disable-zstd
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Do we want (would someone use) the new 'rsync-ssl'-script? On a firewall!?
>>
>> I tried to find out what this is useful for. It doesn’t harm us and calls openssl. So I would just leave it in there.
>
> Ok.
>
> Please note:
>
> 'rsync 3.2.1' just came out. I'm testing - and working on 'zstd 1.4.5'
> (weekend, I think).
>
> If you want, we could skip 3.2.0 => no need to merge this patch.
>
> I could mark 3.2.0 as 'superseded' in patchwork and we'll go straight to
> 3.2.1.
Yes, absolutely do that. There is no point in merging 3.2.0 if 3.2.1 is already under works.
Best,
-Michael
>
> Opinions?
>
> Best,
> Matthias
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-25 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-20 15:09 Matthias Fischer
2020-06-25 8:54 ` Michael Tremer
2020-06-25 15:28 ` Matthias Fischer
2020-06-25 15:35 ` Michael Tremer [this message]
2020-06-25 15:56 ` Matthias Fischer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=10D1F12A-DEEC-4C23-93FD-A33CF9A919D2@ipfire.org \
--to=michael.tremer@ipfire.org \
--cc=development@lists.ipfire.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox