kos13

Yes, we have tcp for LAN only. Will have the tcp for Internet in next builds.

This feature is not implemented yet. Honestly speaking, I don't know how to implement it. Keep in mind that Sync is cross platform, so if you have file that is created by jon and synchronize it with Windows, how we should preserve the user name.

Sync doesn't support Openmeta tags. Reason is that Sync is cross platform and if you will synchronize is to Linux/Windows all openmeta tags will be lost

Autoupdate was implemented in .99 builds. However we changed the Secret size and product name, so we could auto-update silently. We had to upgrade and this is painful. We still have all the oldest builds for Synology, just renamed it to glibc 2.4 builds. Just find proper CPU type and use proper glibc builds.

Some Linux 64bit ditro are missing 32 bits libraries that you will need to install. From the product perspective there are no differences,

I don't have any specific date. The only thing I can share, it has very high prio.

Sync doesn't support proxy at the moment, we plan to add this very soon.

Windows version doesn't have a CLI. There were some workarounds to run Sync as service, but it didn't work for everyone. We plan to add CLI to windows and ability to run Sync as service.

We don't have an ARM build with glibc 2.3 support only x86. We will add this binary soon.

This is a bug, you can't add folder with #. It will be fixed. Thanks!

We plan to add support for more CPU types.

You need to do chmod +x ./btsync

Not at the moment. We will add this functionality soon.

BTSync does that. However this is not how rsync works. If you will add just one byte, all chunks will be changed. You need to detect shifted chunks.

We made a first step in this direction. We understand importance of rsync, but it will be next step. You are right, this is one of the advantages. Another one is uTP and direct connection between peers. To give you real example, try to pass 500 Mb to your friend. If you don't mind, compare the speed of Dropbox and Sync. This will surprise you.

Yes, this was a surprise to us too, that Sync is the only effective way to send 1Gb between 3 computers.

Forgot your original question I am not aware of any rsync based solution that is serverless and distributed. Sync is truly server-less and distributed, this is why it is not rsync based.

Dropbox is rsync made for people. It is nice and perfect. Sync is about moving huge data, try to move 300Mb file via Dropbox and Sync and you fill the difference. Sync never planned to be a replacement for Dropbox/rsync, while it has some features that looks the same. If you need to send parents 500Mb of your kid's photo/video - you don't need a rsync, right? We already have some diff based transfer, however not rsync like. Sync can't detect shifted blocks of data. If block wasn't shifted, it will not be send again.

Sync doesn't follow symlinks now. We plan to make it configurable.

This is a big day for us, and I would like to thank you guys for your help. You helped us a lot! Thank you!!!

We are open for public. You could download latest build here: http://labs.bittorrent.com/experiments/sync.html

speed might be more than 0 - it shows Sync traffic but not actual file data. Devices will show also big numbers. This is again due to a fact that Sync assumes it needs to synchronize everything, but later it discovers that nothing needs to be transfered. This use case is not clear from UI perspective and could be optimized. However Sync will not re-transfer this 26GB.

Do you see an actual transfer, or just files in "Transfer" tab with the speed 0? Sync see file with the same file name but different timestamp, so it decides that files are different and need to be synchronized. Sync shows file in "Transfer" tab, then it scans both files tries to find what needs to be transfered. Then it detects that files are identical and the only change that needs to be made - change timestamp.

Sorry for the delay in answering. Yes Sync tries to contact UPnP devices, so it may affect the receiver. Try to unselect use NAT UPnP port mapping and see if it will help

I'll get back to this topic with more detailed information soon