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>