Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 03:52:32 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: marck@rinet.ru Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rsync vs installworld Message-ID: <20031020.035232.08284225.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20031020134508.P36677@woozle.rinet.ru> References: <200310200705.JAA06855@galaxy.hbg.de.ao-srv.com> <20031020.031124.05471800.imp@bsdimp.com> <20031020134508.P36677@woozle.rinet.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <20031020134508.P36677@woozle.rinet.ru> Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru> writes: : On Mon, 20 Oct 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote: : : MWL> In message: <200310200705.JAA06855@galaxy.hbg.de.ao-srv.com> : MWL> Helge Oldach <helge.oldach@atosorigin.com> writes: : MWL> : Rsync doesn't deal with file flags (chflags(2)). Thus my personal : MWL> : preference for updating machines is making installworld on a file system : MWL> : exported by the build server. : MWL> : MWL> I'm looking for ways to avoid having NFS run on the network in : MWL> question at all. : : netpipe by dds@ then? The first drawback of course is that netpipe opens : back-connection which isn't good for strict firewalls, but I think this could : be avoided by inventing something like "passive netpipe" mode... I'm not familiar with this. Can you proivde a URL? Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031020.035232.08284225.imp>