antimojv

Members
  • Posts

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by antimojv

  1. I have a similar configuration with Virtualbox (using snapshot) in the last month and everithing work fine for now. File in use with the VM are not synchronized until they are available (Windows host).
  2. I need to synchronize folder only on internal lan (two pc on 192.168.1.*) so i uncheck all properties of a folder, and leave checked only "Search Lan" on a Folder that have a read only key (on both pc in internal lan) But i see that there are transfer even outside to external peer (over internet connection) from both PC. I'm missing something? Version 1.3.94 Thank you
  3. Hi RomanZ, these are my opinion, so this is only a point of view. It's up to BitTorrent to decide if it's useful or not to follow SymLink, from my point of view they are useful (my home in linux system is a simple symlink to a different filesystem because /root disk was too small). "people want symlinks to point outside of the sync folder (main usage scenario - accumulating all backup data in one folder)." Yes this is one of my need. - The option in rsynch copy-unsafe-links could be a solution, may be it's not useful to implement the safe option. This tells rsync to copy the referent of symbolic links that point outside the copied tree 1) Symlinks are ruining tree-shape of the directory structure. They can wrap directory structure into itself. -- If a user use symlinks and create recurse subdir in itself (if i understand correclty the statement "wrap directory structure into itself") i think there is no problem fot BtSync, user have to correct the problem they create, it' not a BtSync problem. May be BtSynch can check when it happen and give a warning or refuse to synch the dir (some command in Linux give such a warning may be the find command or similar don't remember) 2) Symlinks can drive BTSync out of directory (and store in general much more information than user expect) -- Again if a user create a symlink thath point to an external Path/Storage/Directory/File System or similar from my point of view it's not a problem. I do this when i need it 3) Symlinks can bring BTSync to some network location which contains more info than expected -- Missing the meaning (my english is not perfect ) 4) Symlinks can bring BTSync to a filesystem which is not compatible with current FS. -- This could be a problem, but i don't know the full btsync implementation. Again it's a user decision, but if i understand right could lead to some problem in BTsync? Permission or other type of problem? May be a warning or refuse to synch could resolve the problem? 5) <probably some other peculiarities which i'm missing right now, but you also can guess> Yes i agree this could cause a more complex implementation , testing and so on , so again it's useful for me but this is only my point of view. My 0.0002 cents !
  4. I generate a new folder with a encryption key I use Windows 7, and apparently a right configuration file (encryption key is generated). But the windows Btsynch didn't see any file in folder (there are many files in dir ) , and peers are not aligned (ok if i can't see any file in original folder nothing could be aligned )
  5. For me the Symlinks are generally useful, but is a personal point of view, may be not useful for any other. They could introduce more complexity so they need to be evaluated May be some suggestion on how they are handled could be found here http://rsync.samba.org/ftp/rsync/rsync.html Chapter Symbolic Link Anyway i'm not sayng that btsync equals rsync or similar thing , this is only a suggestion, and i actually prefer btsync in some cases in my daily use (more easy to use at all, no needed ssh server , no port configuration etc etc )
  6. I can confirm this issue seems resolved: - fixed issue with handle leak for Linux and Linux-based platforms
  7. Thank you , your support it's impressive ! I think i have a previous installation or have done (last year) some bad operation. I clean all, as per your instruction. Last starts were done, as you say, but the problem persist, i saw a lot of ": WriteToDisk: Too many open files" (this is not a package problem i know but is blocking all sync operation for many people) As it appear to be a bug on many different installation on linux machine http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/29255-btsync-error-check-too-many-open-files/ is there any easy way to install a previous package version (1.3.77 for example) that work better? Thank you a lot!
  8. Last post, i promise As it appear to be a bug on many different installation , is there any easy way to install a previous package version (1.3.77 for example) that work better?
  9. Anyway for example it's not clear how to revert to 1.3.77 on "Raspbian GNU/Linux 7 (wheezy)" for example , i use the unofficial distribution http://forum.bittorrent.com/topic/18974-debian-and-ubuntu-server-unofficial-packages-for-bittorrent-sync/ Could someone help me (and probably ohter person) on how to revert to previous version ?
  10. Same problem on raspberry damn previous version seems don't have this bug, now all synching stopped this is my "main" server Web interface say that: "Don't have permissions to write to the selected folder." CPU 98% Too bad.....
  11. Sorry, it's not clear if the feedback it's sufficent to report a bug. I could reproduce the beahaviour if you need more info. Thank you Antimo
  12. Ok, waiting for new version (and developer key requested some months ago )
  13. Seems developing is stopped? No new version from November 2013 If you are in trouble better to open source the application (yes i know that there is another thread but may be this is the right time?)
  14. I have asked for API Key with the form but did not receive any API Key (nor by mail or message in the forum). What is the right path to obtain the Key, or how to understand if i'm eligilbe to obtain the key? Thank you in advance Antimo
  15. I didn't receive my API key ,i fiill the form with request but receive nothing (by email?). How could i receive the Key? Should i give more detail about my projects or similar? Thank you
  16. Any news for my key? Asked some day ago , they will be sent by email? Thank you
  17. Ok, this is the behavior i excpected too . I asked for an API Key with the Form but actually did not receive nothing. may be i need to send more detail about this idea in the form?
  18. Nice code, but seems not to run, i think i need a valid api key (i've tried to substitute XXX with a casual string ) I asked for api with the form yesterday, but still received nothing on my email . Actually the problem (i think API KEY related) is Process [btsync] <defunct> Application waiting "Waiting while the files are being indexed..." Hope i receive (if i'm fine with my intent) the API KEY Thank you Antimo
  19. Thank you a lot for the fast answer i give a look at API !!!
  20. The object is to - Crete a user (linux user) on my raspberry (friend1) - create a BTSynch instance started by this user (in Ubuntu distibution we could have instance associated with a single user) - User login in and set his new password (linux passowrd) so only him know this passowrd - The folder in which the user is writing his data is encrypted (with encrypt fs or similar) with a password setted by the user friend1 (may be logging with ssh or similar option) - The user login on web interface of the right instance (using right port) create a secret key , the data will be saved in the ecnrypted folder So at this point: - The data could be seen only from this user and not by me or other user of the system - With whis approach data will be replicated on other users (friends) machine as soon as they will use the same approach Is this possible? I would like to create a secure private backup system with my friends , and we share storage and connection Any idea is welcome
  21. +1 for me too , symlinks / soft link are very useful for me too!!