Re: Website upload

[Phil Holmes]

Sorry for top post - as you see my email client doesn't properly indent your 
reply.

Anyway, I've now done the following command:

rsync -n -aO -d --no-r --delete -i $BUILD/out-website/website/ 
$DEST/website/ &>rs.txt

Which gives the output in the attached file.  I guess this means it would 
only delete the filenames preceded by "*deleting" - I assume the other files 
named are just for information?

--
Phil Holmes


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
To: "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden>
Cc: "Urs Liska" <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: Website upload


"Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:

> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden>
> To: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>; "Urs Liska" <address@hidden>
> Cc: <address@hidden>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 11:31 AM
> Subject: Re: Website upload
>
>
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Urs Liska" <address@hidden>
> > To: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
> > Cc: "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2017 11:08 AM
> > Subject: Re: Website upload
> >
> >
> > > Maybe someone with privileges on the server could manually run rsync
> > > with the --delete and the -n (dry run) option and presenting us with the
> > > list of files that would be deleted remotely. Probably this would
> > > quickly tell us if we have legitimate "orphaned" files.
> > >
> > > Urs
> >
> >
> > That sounds like a good plan.  AFAICS I would need to run the line
> > from make-website.sh, but with those added options:
> >
> > rsync -raO -n --delete $BUILD/out-website/website/ $DEST/website/
> >
> > ??
>
>
> Hmm.  Tried that.  No output.

-n, --dry-run
This makes rsync perform a  trial run that doesn’t make
any changes (and  produces mostly the same  output as a
real  run).  It  is most  commonly used  in combination
with  the -v,  --verbose  and/or -i,  --itemize-changes
options to  see what  an rsync command  is going  to do
before one actually runs it.

The  output  of  --itemize-changes is  supposed  to  be
exactly the same on a dry run and a subsequent real run
(barring   intentional   trickery   and   system   call
failures);  if it  isn’t, that’s  a bug.   Other output
should  be mostly  unchanged,  but may  differ in  some
areas.  Notably,  a dry  run does  not send  the actual
data for  file transfers, so --progress  has no effect,
the  bytes  sent,  bytes received,  literal  data,  and
matched data statistics are  too small, and the speedup
value is  equivalent to a  run where no  file transfers
were needed.

Maybe add -i to the options?

How did you catch the output?  On a terminal or via redirection?  Maybe
you need to redirect stderr as well?

--
David Kastrup

rs.txt
Description: Text document