Re: where is tra? (was: Re: [9fans] replica/pull hungup channel)

Re: where is tra? (was: Re: [9fans] replica/pull hungup channel)

[Russ Cox]

tra is at http://pdos.lcs.mit.edu/~rsc/tra

Re: [9fans] replica/pull hungup channel

[rog]

> But next, I am a little scared by many lines of;
>                                                        ^^^^^^^^
> > 	somefile: locally created; will not update
>
> This will not happen so frequently, if you'd really changed them localy.
> It will happen only at developping site.  :-)

mind you, it's not clear what you're supposed to do when you get lots
of such messages to resolve them in a safe way.  i finally got around
to trying to use replica to synchronise from our fileserver to my
laptop, and got 22602 such lines; when i actually went through and did
a cmp of all those files, it turned out that only 192 were genuinely
different.  i didn't find replica easy to use!

then i tried tra, which was altogether easier...  and surprisingly
quick, considering the amount of data that it was shifting.  i was a
little surprised to find it indexing in directories that i thought i'd
excluded, though.

  cheers,
    rog.

where is tra? (was: Re: [9fans] replica/pull hungup channel)

[Axel Belinfante]

Where can I find tra?

I tried to search for tra in my 9fans mail, and only found link
   ftp://ftp.deas.harvard.edu/techreports/tr-01-01.ps.gz
which did't seem to work when I tried it.

Axel.

rog wrote:
> mind you, it's not clear what you're supposed to do when you get lots
> of such messages to resolve them in a safe way.  i finally got around
> to trying to use replica to synchronise from our fileserver to my
> laptop, and got 22602 such lines; when i actually went through and did
> a cmp of all those files, it turned out that only 192 were genuinely
> different.  i didn't find replica easy to use!
>
> then i tried tra, which was altogether easier...  and surprisingly
> quick, considering the amount of data that it was shifting.  i was a
> little surprised to find it indexing in directories that i thought i'd
> excluded, though.