Article:		Automated Backups on Tiger Using rsync
Subject:		Beware rsync's huge bug...
Date:		2005-07-22 16:18:17
From:		mechanist
Rsync is fantastic for backups... except if you use the version included with Tiger, as described in this article, you'll likely encounter a big honking bug. Beginning with Tiger there's the "-E" option that specifies "extended" attributes such as resource forks should be copied. Great, right? But if you use "-E" and "-a" (archive) together, as you would for a backup, the modification dates of the copied files will be incorrect. With "-a" the modification date of the copied file should be the same as that of the original. But with "-a" and "-E", and when the file has a resource fork, the modification date of the copied file will match the date OF THE COPY, not of the original file. I reported this to Apple for 10.4; they marked it as a duplicate. The bug is still present in 10.4.2. For now you're better off using the version of rsync included with RsyncX.

Showing messages 1 through 3 of 3.

• Beware rsync's huge bug...
  2005-09-28 02:02:32  maceis [Reply | View]
  
  
  This is true, but only files which have a ressource fork are affected.

• Beware rsync's huge bug...
  2005-07-23 23:35:44  KonradHosemann [Reply | View]
  
  
  The rsync od RsyncX has the same problem, as well as hfsrsync from darwinports, which is the same as the RsyncX rsync, I guess.
  
  Do you know an rync which definetly doesn't have this bug?

• Beware rsync's huge bug...
  2005-07-22 16:31:15  Corvus [Reply | View]
  
  
  Thanks Mechanist; I've been using rsync for months and never noticed that. rsync compares file data, it doesn't use the modificatin date, but still...
  
  I'll try it with RsyncX.