From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Peter Dyballa Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs Subject: Re: 23.0.60; TRAMP fails to copy a gzip'ed file Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:12:50 +0100 Message-ID: <417D82EC-E8E3-4F1F-BDAE-E153AF45FCBB@freenet.de> References: <6351A346-5EE7-4B65-9742-B16C56D689A4@gmx.de> <0A425FC8-F47F-488D-99FB-FA357B21C856@gmx.de> <1663FCE9-D7C8-4E02-8A52-F6982A88049F@freenet.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; delsp=yes; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1205248479 18673 80.91.229.12 (11 Mar 2008 15:14:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:14:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org To: Michael Albinus Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 11 16:14:57 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JZ6Ak-00048x-BR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:13:46 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ6AB-00055q-Of for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:13:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ6A7-00054t-GH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:13:07 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ6A6-00054g-Jv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:13:07 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JZ6A6-00054d-Cn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:13:06 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ6A6-0005oT-C9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:13:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166] helo=mx10.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ6A5-0004XL-Id for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:13:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ6A1-0005nO-Vr for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:13:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mout4.freenet.de ([195.4.92.94]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ6A0-0005kw-UT for emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 11:13:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.4.92.22] (helo=12.mx.freenet.de) by mout4.freenet.de with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JZ69t-0004gU-5H; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:12:53 +0100 Original-Received: from fcf6a.f.ppp-pool.de ([195.4.207.106]:54197 helo=[192.168.1.2]) by 12.mx.freenet.de with esmtpsa (ID peter_dyballa@freenet.de) (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (port 25) (Exim 4.69 #12) id 1JZ69s-0007n1-S9; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:12:53 +0100 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:92163 gmane.emacs.pretest.bugs:21529 Archived-At: Am 11.03.2008 um 15:16 schrieb Michael Albinus: > Peter Dyballa writes: > >> The output of cksum is in both cases the same: 1268136719 956556 >> . >> >> I have prepared 2 files, one with uncompressed 11964 bytes, the other >> with 11965 bytes uncompressed. I'll try the verbose test with the >> bigger file ... > > Just one check: does the problem happen only with large compressed > files, or does it happen also with large uncompressed files? > > If it doesn't in the latter case, then it might be a problem of saving > the binary data from the temporary buffer. Maybe something because of > the unicode merge (wild guess, I know). > There might be even more bugs! Yesterday I built my test files on =20 command line with split. In dired i gzip'ed them =96 und two lines =20 became one! Today I tried to gunzip the two files to test =20 uncompressed transfer =96 and again two lines became one in dired. At =20= both times only one file was gzip'ed or gunzip'ed. Uncompresses text (LOG) files up to almost 16 MB are transferred =20 fine. My check was simple: viewing the original file in dired and =20 viewing the copy in dired. Then doing a compare-windows. I also fetched the files with sftp and invoked diff on the command =20 line, diff between the copied and the sftp'ed file. The differences =20 found were new log entries. How does v(iewing) a remote gzip'ed file in dired work? This never =20 showed a(n obvious) problem ... I again could observe that the remote server delivers data at varying =20= rates from less than 10 kB/sec to up to 120 kB/sec. Sftp showed a =20 more stable and higher transfer rate. I'm off now for some hours! -- Mit friedvollen Gr=FC=DFen Pete People say that if you play Microsoft CD's backwards, you hear =20 satanic things, but that's nothing, because if you play them =20 forwards, they install MS Windows.