17 ms·

Rsync replaced with openrsync on macOS Sequoia

562 points by zdw 2y ago

ndegruchy 2y ago
Huh, interesting. I hadn't noticed when I upgraded, but I don't use many of the features of `rsync` to begin with. I ended up installing the real `rsync` shortly thereafter.
- jethro_tell 2y ago
  Why?
  - ndegruchy 2y ago
    Force of habit, I usually install the set of tools I need from homebrew because I know that either Apple has the BSD variants, or has old versions.
wewewedxfgdf 2y ago
Good - MacOS had an old and crappy version of rsync
- dima55 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - modeless 2y ago
    It's really not. The hardware is so good that I put up with it, but it is a bad OS in so many ways. My dream laptop would be a MacBook with a normal keyboard layout and running a well supported version of Linux.
    - jbverschoor 2y ago
      cli? Just run orbstack..
    - mrlonglong 2y ago
      They already do. Asahi Linux.
      - goosedragons 2y ago
        Still missing a bunch of features like USB-C displays. Isn't ready for newer CPUs yet either.
        echelon 2y ago
        Not to mention that the leads are no longer working on it. Asahi Lina and Hector Martin are gone.
        mrlonglong 2y ago
        People constantly badgering for things was why he quit. Patience goes a long way for a harmonious relationship. They were whiny shits.
        goosedragons 2y ago
        I thought he quit because he got in a row with a Linux kernel maintainer?
    - wenc 2y ago
      macOS is a BSD. If you're used to Linux (I am) it feels there are lots of quality of life changes, but I realized it's because I'm used to Linux. The OS itself is fine.
      - echelon 2y ago
        [flagged]
        sbuk 2y ago
        > The GUI / UX is horrible. Coming from someone who would "prefer to be in Gnome or KDE", this is a hard criticism to take seriously. KDE is obviously designed by committee and is therefore UI elements are all over the place, and Gnome is just horrible. > Finder is annoying as hell. The icons / layouts do not snap to resizing, proper navigation requires arcane keyboard shortcuts, it's difficult to open new instances in the expected way, tabs suck, navigation sucks. Finder is made for non-power users. Those "arcane keyboard shortcuts" have been around for 40 years. Or is it the Emacs keybinding that you don't like? Opening a new instance of a Finder window is a Cmd N away. New tab? Cmd T - I do not understand what is hard about that. Oh, and tabs are a feature of the system, and native apps (some non-native too) automatically implement them. It seems to me that someone hasn't RTFM'ed. Some "power user" you seem to be... The rest is rant that macOS isn't $MyFavouriteDistro and that is the only way computers should work. > I do not want to "define" terms with the shitty built in dictionary tool, yet that option eats up context window space in every tool. Oh no! A whole line in a context menu! The horror.
        echelon 2y ago
        Everything you've said is an opinion except for one thing: you're telling the user they're wrong. Classic Apple behavior.
        sbuk 2y ago
        What makes my opinion you any less valid than your opinions? Classic arrogant troll behaviour. I merely pointed out that you are exaggerating. Like I said, you want everything to work like it does with your favourite platform, and if it doesn’t then it’s clearly broken or shit or user hostile. Power user? Don’t make me laugh.
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    It’s adequate. You can use MacPorts to install a more modern Unix environment. Much better than Windows.
  - ndegruchy 2y ago
    Eh, I swap between the big three every day and they're all terrible in their own unique manners. macOS certainly has problems, and Apple's adversarial relationship with open source is not helping anything, but I wouldn't call macOS bad, just not suited for everyone's needs.
  - dghlsakjg 2y ago
    Why? This is an included package from a 3rd party that was kept at a previous version for licensing reasons. If you want the latest version of rsync, you can just install it. Are you upset that MacOs doesn’t include a copy of Libre Office, or every other bit of 3rd party software?
    - yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
      > Are you upset that MacOs doesn’t include a copy of Libre Office, or every other bit of 3rd party software? I'd be kind of unhappy if my OS shipped an old version of LO.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- procaryote 2y ago
  They should just have updated to the recent version of rsync. Their GPL fears are overblown
duskwuff 2y ago
On one hand, it's a little annoying that openrsync doesn't support some features that rsync does. On the other hand, it's great that there are multiple independent implementations of rsync now. It means that it's actually being treated as a protocol, not just a piece of software.
- chungy 2y ago
  The website says "We are still working on it... so please wait." rsync has a lot of features, surely this will take a good amount of time.
- varenc 2y ago
  I'm exciting about this too. It becoming more like a protocol makes me optimistic we'll see binary diff API points based on the rsync algorithm. fun fact: Dropbox internally used rsync binary diff to quickly upload small changes to large file. I assume they still do. But their public API endpoints don't offer this and a small change to a large file means the whole file must be updated.
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    > binary diff API points based on the rsync algorithm Now that's an idea I never considered. Nice.
    - nine_k 2y ago
      Now consider applying it to git. How about clean semantic diffs to your .xlsx files? To your .PNG files?
      - andrewflnr 2y ago
        ...that's rather a different question, I think. Rsync doesn't claim to use a semantic diff.
  - zmj 2y ago
    I implemented rsync's binary diff/patch in .NET several years ago: https://github.com/zmj/rsync-delta https://github.com/zmj/rsync-delta It's a decent protocol, but it has shortcomings. I'd expect most future use cases for that kind of thing to reach for a content-defined chunking algorithm tuned towards their common file formats and sizes.
jeroenhd 2y ago
So, anyone got a good resource on why Apple is so afraid of GPLv3? Surely this shouldn't be a problem as long as they statically compile the executables?
- pjmlp 2y ago
  Not only Apple, everyone. I never worked at any company that allows for GPLv3 dependencies, and even GPLv2 aren't welcomed, unless validated by legal team first.
  - jeroenhd 2y ago
    But Apple did ship GPLv2. They're shipping open source tools with infectious licenses like they always did. This isn't like the normal "take someone else's work for free but don't give anything back" approach most companies follow when they decide to avoid GPL code.
- banqjls 2y ago
  The TiVo clause.
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    It wouldn’t apply to the kernel. Also, a lot of the command line tools are not distributed as part of the OS.
    - jhasse 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - Eggpants 2y ago
        lol. You must be a hoot at parties.
      - mistrial9 2y ago
        from the point of view of the GPL side of the aisle, yes agree they are evil. Shareholders who want returns are on the other side of the aisle, so to speak, and definitely see "risk" and "no" when it comes to anything close to GPL. OK no problem, except that the code that Apple Computer profits mightily with, substantially originates in the former. recall the John Gilmore camp handing out "don't tread on me Apple" buttons 35 years ago.. it has been going on that long. Apple knows very well what they are doing.
banqjls 2y ago
You don't have to embed a github gist to show 5 lines of console output that are not even highlighted. You can use the HTML <code> tag. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML
- bentley 2y ago
  <samp> would be more semantically appropriate.
chasil 2y ago
"...Apple decided that while it could comply with the terms of GPLv2 license with regards to rsync 2.x, it could not comply with the terms of GPLv3 license with regards to rsync 3.x." This is due to the software patent terms that appeared in GPLv3. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21645618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21645618 https://lobste.rs/s/8lbh1k https://lobste.rs/s/8lbh1k https://archive.ph/AeMTz https://archive.ph/AeMTz
- IAmLiterallyAB 2y ago
  I think its actually the anti-Tivoization stuff that they take issue with
  - chasil 2y ago
    The GPL wiki lists software patents prior to the Tivo clauses, and links to this: "Early drafts of version 3 of the GNU General Public License (GPLv3) contained several patent retaliation clauses that varied in scope, some of which were later removed due to concerns about their efficacy. The final published version of GPLv3 contains a patent retaliation clause similar to those in the Apache License and Mozilla Public License, which terminates rights granted by the license in response to litigation alleging patent infringement in the software." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_and_free_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_and_free_soft... That would be a significant factor in avoiding GPLv3.
brian_herman 2y ago
Can someone do an analysis of the packages of macOS Sequoia that are still GPL licenced?
- haunter 2y ago
  I don't know all but the Chess.app is actually one, running the sjeng engine which is GPLv2 licensed https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/Chess/tree/Chess-524.22/sjeng https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/Chess/tree/Chess-... https://sjeng.org/indexold.html https://sjeng.org/indexold.html
tonetheman 2y ago
It has differences in the command lines / behavior. We discovered this last week.
palata 2y ago
Am I the only one finding that "openrsync" sounds like "rsync" is not open source? I find it a bit confusing because rsync is GPL. Just like I would find it weird for a project to be called openlinux or librelinux... Still it's great to have multiple implementations, of course!
- ronsor 2y ago
  It's called openrsync because it's developed for and by OpenBSD.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - palata 2y ago
    I truly respect OpenBSD, but I hope they won't end up writing openopenssl :-) (I will admit: I had to check and openssh is actually "the OpenBSD Secure Shell" project, so I guess it makes sense :-) ).
    - ronsor 2y ago
      Sorry, OpenBSD already wrote libressl and libtls
      - palata 2y ago
        Well "libressl" doesn't sound like an open-source rewrite of the proprietary "openssl" :-). I don't really get the point about libtls, though. But I get it, OpenBSD has been using Open* as a prefix for many projects, I didn't know it :-).
    - yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
      They called their openssl fork libressl - I assume because of exactly that naming conflict - but most of their "exports" follow the convention; OpenBSD, OpenSMTPD, OpenNTPD, OpenSSH. Possibly others that I don't know off the top of my head.
firecall 2y ago
I feel compelled to comment just to note the vintage WordPress Theme being used! Worth a click just to see how we used to live!
NelsonMinar 2y ago
Does openrsync work? The problem with Apple's ancient userspace is so many of the utilities are outdated and don't support things like files bigger than 4GB. So switching to a tool updated in the last 19 years may be an improvement. But then rsync is such a standard, is openrsync 100% compatible? The need to install and maintain Homebrew was a big part of why I switched from MacOS to Windows. WSL is a very good Unix environment, being just Ubuntu or Debian.
- alphabettsy 2y ago
  How is maintaining two operating systems simpler?
  - tymscar 2y ago
    To me this post can be framed under dissonance in the dictionary. Installing a package manager and a package from it apparently is harder than installing an OS and the installing a package from its package manager. And lets be honest here. It’s not like homebrew is a set in stone necessity. I use Nix, theres macports, you can build the package from source. All with less complexity than running what is in the end a whole os in a vm
    - hughw 2y ago
      I'm mystified at Homebrew's dominance. It seemed to come unglued for me every few months. I switched to Macports years ago and my cli world has been stable and up-to-date.
      - pasc1878 2y ago
        I suspect because users and the originbal auithor did not understand multi user UNIX and so don't like the idea of having to use sudo and also they use Apple tools as much as possible rather than controlling the versions of libraries that they use which would be what commercial users were doing with Unix over 20 years before. It also uses /usr/local which is for locally compiled software so you get in a mess if you have a compiled version of a library that is also in Homebrew. Macports and nix and fink will build under a new user id and install as root as per any other Unix. Thus the build can be controlled to only use known versions of other libraries. Homebrew installs as the current user. - Try using it when you do have multiple users on a mac (which is uncommon).
fmajid 2y ago
Just like they replaced bash with zsh. Most Big Tech firms are allergic to GPL3.
- 7e 2y ago
  GPLv3 is a legal landmine. In fact, GPL itself is wildly unpopular compared to more open licenses. The FSF is getting what it deserve here. Open source predates the FSF and will remain long after the FSF is dead.
  - wanderingmind 2y ago
    Can you show examples of impactful open software that predates fsf and stallman?
    - donnachangstein 2y ago
      BSD predates the Stallman Utilities (kernel sold separately) by about a decade.* * in "shared source" form
      - hollerith 2y ago
        The BSD releases did not form a complete OS and were not runnable except in combination with source code from ATT Unix, which was emphatically proprietary software. The first release of BSD that was unequivocally legal for anyone to acquire and run without getting ATT's permission was 4.4BSD-Lite in June 1994. (Yes, organizations did create OSes from BSD Networking Release 2 (Net/2) released in June 1991, but legal uncertainty hung around them for years.) In contrast, by 1984, Stallman had already formed a close working relationship with a competent lawyer (Eben Moglen) to devise a legal strategy to maximize the probability that everyone will continue to enjoy a list of freedoms (chosen by Stallman) around any software put under the GPL.
        donnachangstein 2y ago
        > but legal uncertainty hung around them for years. I mean if we're going to split hairs and play this game, SCO claimed ownership to alleged Unix code in Linux which wasn't initially resolved until 2008 or so (and further continued for another decade). That never stopped anybody.
numbsafari 2y ago
I stopped treating Mac OS as a Unix and I started sleeping at night. It’s a great platform for running a Unix in a VM.
- pjmlp 2y ago
  It helps not to mistake UNIX with GNU/Linux, as first step into tranquility.
- latexr 2y ago
  macOS is a certified UNIX. https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/ https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/ Perhaps what you mean is that the definition of what it means to be a UNIX has changed for you and you prefer to run UNIX-inspired or UNIX-compatible systems.
  - numbsafari 2y ago
    I think "certified unix" is meaningless to most people who use "a unix".
    - wpm 2y ago
      I think a lot of people who use "a unix" just use "a linux"
ikmckenz 2y ago
And yet I don't see Apple on the list of contributors of the OpenBSD Foundation (https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/contributors.html https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/contributors.html), shame.
- OsrsNeedsf2P 2y ago
  The BSD ecosystem benefits from MacOS plenty. Apple doesn't need to be a monetary donator, I for one would be grateful if Apple used my tools at all
  - WD-42 2y ago
    Have some self respect lol
Symbiote 2y ago
> openrsync is written as part of the rpki-client(1) project, an RPKI validator for OpenBSD. openrsync was funded by NetNod, IIS.SE, SUNET and 6connect. Could anyone suggest why these organizations would want to fund this development? https://github.com/kristapsdz/openrsync?tab=readme-ov-file#project-background https://github.com/kristapsdz/openrsync?tab=readme-ov-file#p...
- jimsmart 2y ago
  This comment explains the reason for its existence quite well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43605846 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43605846 Companies fund things because they're useful or necessary. My guess is that some of the companies listed might use BSD — and perhaps wanted/needed an implementation of rsync that was not GPL3 licensed. And/or they simply have an interest in funding Open Source projects / development.
  - Squossifrage 2y ago
    Three out of four aren't even companies. SUNET is the Swedish NREN, NetNod is a non-profit that manages Internet infrastructure services (like DNS and NTP) in Sweden, IIS is the non-profit that manages the Swedish TLDs.
    - jimsmart 2y ago
      Feel free to substitute my use of the word "company", with "company / organisation / foundation". Plus others I'm surely forgetting. I meant 'company' in the sense of a legal entity, probably paying some kind of tax, probably having to register/file their accounts every year. Here in the UK, all of these various different types of 'companies' all have to register with Companies House, and file tax returns to HMRC. 'Company' is the overarching legal term here. — But sure, my bad: the post I was replying to actually used a term that is arguably better, 'organisations'. And I should have used that. But my point still stands, whether a private limited company, or a non-profit of some kind, or an organisation, or a foundation, or a charity, or whatever — they're all legal entities of some kind — and they're all able to fund anything they please, if they see value in it. - NetNod is actually a private limited company according to Wikipedia [1]. Corporate identity number: 556534-0014. - Swedish Internet Foundation, formerly IIS, have corporate identity number: 802405-0190 (on their website [2]) - Sunet is a department of the Swedish Research Council, and uses the Swedish Research Council’s corporate identity number 2021005208, according to their website [3] So they are all registered with the Swedish Companies Registration Office. Which I assume is their equivalent of Companies House here in the UK. Maybe if you still think that they're not 'companies' — of some kind — then perhaps take it up with the Swedish Companies Registration Office! ;) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netnod https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netnod [2] https://internetstiftelsen.se/en/ https://internetstiftelsen.se/en/ [3] https://www.sunet.se/en/contact https://www.sunet.se/en/contact
shmerl 2y ago
To not like GPLv3 one has be a DRM proponent. That checks out for Apple. In practice though authors of GPLv3 see it as a clarification of GPLv2, i.e. they should have the same practical intent.
- shagie 2y ago
  Linus’s views on GPLv3 would be something to watch https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU?si=263GyZd9YaPu4-PC https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU?si=263GyZd9YaPu4-PC
  - shmerl 2y ago
    I agree that it could be a separate license, but that doesn't really contradict the point that GPLv2 was intended to prevent DRM scenarios that in practice violate basic idea of being able to run the changes. It's a natural thing to want, even if Linus doesn't find it important.
tiffanyh 2y ago
Looks like OpenBSD maintains openrsync. https://github.com/kristapsdz/openrsync https://github.com/kristapsdz/openrsync
- emchammer 2y ago
  Apple could do worse than importing tools from the OpenBSD Project. Now there are several more commands that would be helpful...
gausswho 2y ago
Should I be embarassed for my bash alias? alias rsy="rsync -avP" I do this with many unix utils that have insensible (imo) defaults
- emmelaich 2y ago
  I use -i (itemize) or even --ii (itemize everything) rather than -v. Also be aware than -a can conflict with other options -- in classic rsync gotcha fashion.
emmelaich 2y ago
For a while, (up to including Sequioa 15.3) both rsync_samba and rsync_openrsync were available, via /var/select/rsync or the env variable CHOSEN_RSYNC. One particular annoyance of openrsync is that it claimed to support the /./ magic path element for --relative. I sent a bug report to Apple for this about a month ago. rsync_samba is gone as of Sequoia 15.4. I've installed rsync from homebrew.
watersb 2y ago
Patches to mainline rsync added support for extended attributes, particularly for supporting macOS metadata. Bombich "Carbon Copy Cloner" is a GUI app that wraps it. https://support.bombich.com/hc/en-us/articles/20686446501143-Credits#h_01HN3XNGRYMD91E8BQE6JJ56NF https://support.bombich.com/hc/en-us/articles/20686446501143... I started following Mike Bombich from his posts on macOS Server sysadmin boards; see https://web.archive.org/web/20140707182312/http://static.afp548.com/mactips/rsync.html https://web.archive.org/web/20140707182312/http://static.afp... Nathaniel Gray created a testing tool to verify the fidelity of backups; files with multiple streams, extended attributes and ACLs, all the good stuff... Backup Bouncer: https://github.com/n8gray/Backup-Bouncer https://github.com/n8gray/Backup-Bouncer See also this SwiftUI app that wraps rsync, RsyncX. https://github.com/rsyncOSX/RsyncOSX https://github.com/rsyncOSX/RsyncOSX We used to really care about this stuff, back when we were still running software from "Classic" macOS on top of our new UNIX systems. https://web.archive.org/web/20161022012615/http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/ https://web.archive.org/web/20161022012615/http://blog.plast...
- doctorpangloss 2y ago
  The problem with rsync is that it is ridiculously slow. IFileOperation (Windows) and FileManager (macOS) will do the most performant copy supported by the underlying FS. Enabling CRC checks is a checkbox in SMB and ReFS - rsync's content matching step is redundant to a modern SMB share on a modern Windows Server. Windows to Windows, IFileOperation will be like 1.5-8x faster throughput with lower CPU usage than rsync, and maybe 1.2-3x faster than doing a file copy using vanilla golang. And if you don't care about the operating systems that actually use all the complex filesystem metadata, if you only care about Linux, then you only need openrsync or simpler programs.
abotsis 2y ago
I continue to be happy that Apple continues to enhance and embrace the posix side of osx vs gradually stripping it away in some kind of attempt to make it more like iOS.
thrdbndndn 2y ago
As a relatively new Linux user, I often find the "versioning" of bundled system utilities also to be a bit of a mess, for lack of a better word. A classic example, at least from my experience, is `unzip`. On two of my servers (one running Debian and the other an older Ubuntu), neither of their bundled `unzip` versions can handle AES-256 encrypted ZIP files. But apparently, according to some Stack Overflow posts, some distributions have updated theirs to support it. So here is what I ran into: 1. I couldn't easily find an "updated" version of `unzip`, even though I assume it exists and is open source. 2. To make things more confusing, they all claim to be "version 6.00", even though they obviously behave differently. 3. Even if I did find the right version, I'm not sure if replacing the system-bundled one is safe or a good idea. So the end result is that some developer out there (probably volunteering their time) added a great feature to a widely used utility, and yet I still can’t use it. So in a sense, being a core system utility makes `unzip` harder to update than if it were just a third-party tool. I get that it's probably just as bad if not worse on Windows or macOS when it comes to system utilities. But I honestly expected Linux to handle this kind of thing better. (Please feel free to correct me if I’ve misunderstood anything or if there’s a better way to approach this.)
- lukan 2y ago
  No idea, I feel your confusion, I just use 7z and it could handle my zip needs so far (There are always a million ways to do anything on linux). But I assume, you should be able to update unzip without issues. And if no critical service depends on it, just update and see.
  - DonHopkins 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - eli 2y ago
      Why the hostile comments?
      - donnachangstein 2y ago
keepamovin 2y ago
Why can’t the developers just release a licensable corporate version and Apple just agree to pay the corporate license fee?
- saagarjha 2y ago
  Why would they want to?
  - keepamovin 2y ago
    Why would who want to? I consider each of the participants below. But first let me answer generally: Why? Because it's right to. If you create good karma, the world will get better. If you do bad things, the world and your world (ie, your karma) will get worse. Paying for software you use extensively is good karma. Not doing so is bad karma that erodes the world (and your world), because it severs the exchange of value and erodes the justice that arises from that, which then reflects back on you inevitably. For the participants in this archetypal case: Apple - because it's not right to not pay the developers of software you use a lot, even if it was released under permissive licenses. Apple paying rsync producers for their software is just and right. Apple wants to be a good company, so they want to do this, too. Plus they could get a tailored custom license that works for them, and gives them standard good rsync. The rsync developers - so they get the just reward for the value they produce, as is right and absolutely correct. They can choose to allocate that however they want, which is them expressing their good interest. What's good for them, is good for what they produce. Everything gets better. Happy cycle. Everybody else - to participate in that just and right exchange of value, which nourishes the good of both the software, the developers, Apple, and everybody else, supporting the karma of the world, rather than participating in an exploitative abuse that erodes it. More generally, using software extensively that is permissively licensed is not piracy, but it has the effect of piracy in that value consumed is severed from value rewarded to the producers. This is fundamentally exploitative and abusive, in the limit leads to poor software quality by eroding productive capacity. One caveat is large well-organized ad-hocracies that maintain giant FOSS projects, like the FOSS or FOSS-like Linux distributions. These are sort of hybrid volunteer, corporate volunteer forces that are large enough to make such fossonomics work. But there's plenty of hyperuseful software built by tiny, single-person or single-company teams for whom those economies don't work as they don't have that scale nor fractional-corp-labor. To conclude: normalize improving the world and spreading good karma by normalizing paying for the software you use. Even if a given developer team is yet to realize how to bank the value they created for you, as a savvy and responsible software consumer it's your responsibility to seek out and initiate opportunities to pay them, and not to seek out what you can take and exploit. If they make payment available, use it. Basically, it's fairly simple. Don't be evil. And respond to and create opportunities to do good!
linsomniac 2y ago
Am I the only one that has had some hard to pin down problems with rsync? I'm excited about this because I'd love to have an alternative implementation. In particular, "rsync --compress" over SSH seems to have a rare and hard to track down issue. I've used rsync for decades doing hundreds of nightly system backups, and maybe once a month one of them goes out to lunch (IIRC it just hangs). The rarity of it makes it hard to isolate or come up with a reproduction. Removing the "--compress" resolves it. Anyone else ever come across something like that?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
system7rocks 2y ago
In general, Apple has had such a positive influence on both hardware and software that I welcome their particular approach. It may not be ideal from a pure Linux perspective, but it does open the door to a variety of approaches. And truly, that is the key - there should always be multiple licenses and approaches to the work of open source. So, thank you, Apple. But please open source System 7.
yonran 2y ago
I ran into this issue too since I implemented an --rsh wrapper script (based on https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/13776 https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/13776) and the options passed to ssh are different (samba rsync passes in -l user host command, openrsync passes in user@host command). > openrsync accepts only a subset of rsync’s command line arguments. I have not upgraded to MacOS Sequoia yet so I cannot verify but from the source (https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/rsync/blob/rsync-91.60.3/rsync.wrapper.c https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/rsync/blob/rsync-...) it appears that there is a wrapper and they ship both samba rsync and openrsync and fall back to samba if you use an unsupported option?
- stephenr 2y ago
  Interestingly, I see evidence of that wrapper on my Sonoma machine, but `/usr/libexec/rsync/` only contains the `rsync.samba` binary, On my Sequoia machines, there is no `/usr/libexec/rsync`, and the `rsync` binary at /usr/bin seems to just be the regular `openrsync` binary.
pjmlp 2y ago
As I keep telling, GNU/Linux had a lucky moment sidestepping the whole issue of AT&T trying to get control back from UNIX, had this not taken place and everyone would be using classical UNIXes, with some BSD code running on them. You see the same on embedded as well, all new kids on the block as embedded FOSS OSes or bare metal libraries, are either Apache or MIT licensed.
brunorsini 2y ago
After decades using rsync for my local backups, I recently switched to ChronoSync Express. It's simple to use, with a sensible GUI and well-laid-out customization options. And btw, it's included on Setapp subscriptions.
adrian_b 2y ago
Looking at the sparse documentation of openrsync does not create any confidence for me that it can be an acceptable substitute for rsync. In my opinion, any program that is supposed to copy files, but which is not able to make perfect copies, i.e. copies that do not lose any bit of data or metadata that was present in the original file, is just unusable garbage. Unfortunately, most copying programs available in UNIX-like operating systems (and also many archiving programs) do not make perfect file copies with their default options and many of them are never able to make perfect copies, regardless what options are used. I have not looked recently at the scp command of ssh, but at least until a few years ago it was not possible to make perfect file copies with scp, especially when the copies were done between different operating systems and file systems. That is why I never use scp, but only rsync over ssh. Rsync is the only program that I have seen, which is able (with the right options) to make perfect file copies even between different operating systems and file systems (for instance between FreeBSD with UFS and Linux with XFS), preserving also metadata like extended file attributes, access control lists and high-precision file timestamps (some copying programs and archiving programs truncate high-precision timestamps). The current documentation of openrsync does not make any guarantee that it can make complete file copies, so by default I assume that it cannot, so for now it is a program that I consider useless. Beside rsync for copying, one of the few Linux archiving programs that can archive perfect file copies is bsdtar (when using the pax file format; the ancient tar and cpio file formats cannot store all modern file metadata). (FYI: I always alias rsync to '/usr/bin/rsync --archive --xattrs --acls --hard-links --progress --rsh="ssh -p XXX -l YYYYYYY"') (With the right CLI options, "cp" from coreutils can make perfect file copies, but only if it has been compiled with appropriate options; some Linux distributions compile coreutils with wrong options, e.g. without extended file attributes support, in which case "cp" makes only partial file copies, without giving any warnings or errors.)
- graemep 2y ago
  This is a licensing issue for Apple, and only a small proportion of their users will care about this, and those users will just install rsync.
  - adrian_b 2y ago
DeathArrow 2y ago
Is good that we see BSD software thriving.
secure 2y ago
I looked at openrsync when I was writing my own https://github.com/gokrazy/rsync https://github.com/gokrazy/rsync implementation (in Go!) and it’s good code :) It’s a shame that openrsync is not 100% compatible with rsync — I noticed that Apple was starting to switch to openrsync because my own tests broke on macOS 15.
procaryote 2y ago
I already replace the bundled rsync on mac with the proper one, as the bundled one is ancient and is missing some features I like. Same for grep, awk, sed, find Mac OS is getting a bit worse every release, clearly trending towards an iOS world where we have to ask apple for permission to run anything, even in a sandbox
larusso 2y ago
How is it these days for other developers actually banking on certain tools to be present / working. What I mean is that apple isn’t shipping rsync etc to help us developers but because the system needs it. It was already mentioned that this issue also exists for the other cli tools because they ship the BSD not the Gnu versions. Which brings me to POSIX which was introduced back then to tackle just that. Make sure that a set of tools has defined options / behavior etc. it seems to me that we lapsed here because more and more systems ship very custom setups which are not compatible. Or see the Linux and the issue with binary compatibility and the state of flatpack vs Snap vs others. I fear it becomes harder and harder to create cross platform solutions by using the system provided packages. Writing a shell script is already a challenge.
DeathArrow 2y ago
I see most people are discussing BSD VS GPL v3 and some wonder why on earth do we need more than one implementation of the rsync protocol. My view is that having more than one choice is good. It is good for both people and companies that we have BSD and Linux. It is good we have both BSD and GPL. Sometimes, having too many choices is bad because it leads to fragmentation, creates support and technical issues and leads to analysis paralysis and procrastination. But it's not the case here.
INTPenis 2y ago
This hardly matters as any power user will keep their own toolset maintained from brew I guess. And relying on open source CLI tools in Macintosh for helping end users is not a good idea. What this signals to me most of all is "oh we can't steal from GNU anymore so we'll steal from openbsd". Because even if it is a neglible part of the appeal of Macintosh computers, they still make an effort to ship these tools with their OS and they make a lot of money doing it.
simongray 2y ago
I wonder if this is why Time Machine started taking up all my CPU resources after I upgraded? I had to shut off automated Time Machine backups because it literally makes my M1 MBA unusable for few minutes every hour.
SuperSandro2000 2y ago
Yeah, more MacOS utilities that accept slightly different arguments.
- latexr 2y ago
  Technically it’s a BSD utility, so still open-source and you can contribute to it.
0x0 2y ago
I recently ran into an issue with this because building an iOS .ipa from the command line with xcodebuild apparently ends up shelling out to call rsync to copy some files between local directories, and because I had homebrew rsync earlier in $PATH, it would end up running homebrew rsync, but xcodebuild passed an openrsync-only command line argument "--extended-attributes" that homebrew rsync doesn't understand and would exit with a failure.
egorfine 2y ago
Thanks for bringing attention to it. Did `brew install rsync` immediately, problem solved, fuck Apple.
wkat4242 2y ago
Lol. Apple's war on GPL 3 again. Same reason they replaced bash with zsh. I'm glad I'm no longer using their stuff. And yes I would need a complete implementation obviously.
p0w3n3d 2y ago
Strange, I've always thought about GPLv3 as of an upgrade (i.e. better license) to GPLv2
- wkat4242 2y ago
  It's an upgrade for us, yes. But not for the companies that want to pretend they're doing FOSS. Like Apple these days. They had a good run where they really were open, like when they created OpenCL and Darwin was kept up to date. However these days most of their APIs are closed and Darwin is always lagging behind. Not that anyone actually uses that anyway, but still..
- sbuk 2y ago
  It seems to me that it has actually been harmful to F/LOSS in the longer term. Where before, there were companies that were contributing to and using F/LOSS, GPLv3 put a stop to that virtually overnight. Now we see comments like "$MEGACORP should stop leaching" or "$MEGACORP should sponsor/ contribute more" - which of course they did, with time and people before the GPLv3 was released.
maggiepatel375 2y ago
[flagged]
steeeeeve 2y ago
This is one of those decisions that confuses you when you're on a mac and things just don't work how you'd expect.
DeborahEmeni_ 2y ago
Apple's shift away from GPL has been showing for years, so this doesn't surprise me. But dropping rsync 2.6.9 this late without full 3.x support feels like a step backwards, especially for anyone relying on metadata preservation. I get the licensing angle, but the lack of feature parity in opensync might catch a lot of people off guard.
toutiao6 2y ago
[dead]
ernst_mulder 2y ago
Beware if you want to copy files with extended attributes, ACLs or resource forks to another Mac. The short syntax used to be "rsync -Eva" Since openrsync this is now "rsync -va ---extended-attributes" I will need to go through a bunch of scripts now I'm afraid. Bye bye Eva.
kt51 2y ago
It looks like there are quite a few glitches in Apple's openrsync. Deletion of two files resulted in four deletion entries. rsync -av --delete --dry-run a/ b/ Transfer starting: 2 files folder1/file2: deleting folder1/file1: deleting ./folder1/file2: deleting ./folder1/file1: deleting Also, if a directory has extended attributes, `rsync -av --extended-attributes` resulted in `._` folders in the destination directory. It is not an acceptable replacement for the original rsync.
ak007 2y ago
It broke the `--log-files` CLI switch that I used to backup my local files to shared storage :-(. Had to reinstall rsync via homebrew to get it back

562 points by zdw 2y ago

Huh, interesting. I hadn't noticed when I upgraded, but I don't use many of the features of `rsync` to begin with. I ended up installing the real `rsync` shortly thereafter.

jethro_tell 2y ago
Why?
- ndegruchy 2y ago
  Force of habit, I usually install the set of tools I need from homebrew because I know that either Apple has the BSD variants, or has old versions.

wewewedxfgdf 2y ago

Good - MacOS had an old and crappy version of rsync

dima55 2y ago
[flagged]
- modeless 2y ago
  It's really not. The hardware is so good that I put up with it, but it is a bad OS in so many ways. My dream laptop would be a MacBook with a normal keyboard layout and running a well supported version of Linux.
  - jbverschoor 2y ago
    cli? Just run orbstack..
  - mrlonglong 2y ago
    They already do. Asahi Linux.
    - goosedragons 2y ago
      Still missing a bunch of features like USB-C displays. Isn't ready for newer CPUs yet either.
      - echelon 2y ago
        Not to mention that the leads are no longer working on it. Asahi Lina and Hector Martin are gone.
        mrlonglong 2y ago
        People constantly badgering for things was why he quit. Patience goes a long way for a harmonious relationship. They were whiny shits.
        goosedragons 2y ago
        I thought he quit because he got in a row with a Linux kernel maintainer?
  - wenc 2y ago
    macOS is a BSD. If you're used to Linux (I am) it feels there are lots of quality of life changes, but I realized it's because I'm used to Linux. The OS itself is fine.
    - echelon 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - sbuk 2y ago
        > The GUI / UX is horrible. Coming from someone who would "prefer to be in Gnome or KDE", this is a hard criticism to take seriously. KDE is obviously designed by committee and is therefore UI elements are all over the place, and Gnome is just horrible. > Finder is annoying as hell. The icons / layouts do not snap to resizing, proper navigation requires arcane keyboard shortcuts, it's difficult to open new instances in the expected way, tabs suck, navigation sucks. Finder is made for non-power users. Those "arcane keyboard shortcuts" have been around for 40 years. Or is it the Emacs keybinding that you don't like? Opening a new instance of a Finder window is a Cmd N away. New tab? Cmd T - I do not understand what is hard about that. Oh, and tabs are a feature of the system, and native apps (some non-native too) automatically implement them. It seems to me that someone hasn't RTFM'ed. Some "power user" you seem to be... The rest is rant that macOS isn't $MyFavouriteDistro and that is the only way computers should work. > I do not want to "define" terms with the shitty built in dictionary tool, yet that option eats up context window space in every tool. Oh no! A whole line in a context menu! The horror.
        echelon 2y ago
        Everything you've said is an opinion except for one thing: you're telling the user they're wrong. Classic Apple behavior.
        sbuk 2y ago
        What makes my opinion you any less valid than your opinions? Classic arrogant troll behaviour. I merely pointed out that you are exaggerating. Like I said, you want everything to work like it does with your favourite platform, and if it doesn’t then it’s clearly broken or shit or user hostile. Power user? Don’t make me laugh.
- rbanffy 2y ago
  It’s adequate. You can use MacPorts to install a more modern Unix environment. Much better than Windows.
- ndegruchy 2y ago
  Eh, I swap between the big three every day and they're all terrible in their own unique manners. macOS certainly has problems, and Apple's adversarial relationship with open source is not helping anything, but I wouldn't call macOS bad, just not suited for everyone's needs.
- dghlsakjg 2y ago
  Why? This is an included package from a 3rd party that was kept at a previous version for licensing reasons. If you want the latest version of rsync, you can just install it. Are you upset that MacOs doesn’t include a copy of Libre Office, or every other bit of 3rd party software?
  - yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
    > Are you upset that MacOs doesn’t include a copy of Libre Office, or every other bit of 3rd party software? I'd be kind of unhappy if my OS shipped an old version of LO.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
procaryote 2y ago
They should just have updated to the recent version of rsync. Their GPL fears are overblown

duskwuff 2y ago

On one hand, it's a little annoying that openrsync doesn't support some features that rsync does. On the other hand, it's great that there are multiple independent implementations of rsync now. It means that it's actually being treated as a protocol, not just a piece of software.

chungy 2y ago
The website says "We are still working on it... so please wait." rsync has a lot of features, surely this will take a good amount of time.
varenc 2y ago
I'm exciting about this too. It becoming more like a protocol makes me optimistic we'll see binary diff API points based on the rsync algorithm. fun fact: Dropbox internally used rsync binary diff to quickly upload small changes to large file. I assume they still do. But their public API endpoints don't offer this and a small change to a large file means the whole file must be updated.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  > binary diff API points based on the rsync algorithm Now that's an idea I never considered. Nice.
  - nine_k 2y ago
    Now consider applying it to git. How about clean semantic diffs to your .xlsx files? To your .PNG files?
    - andrewflnr 2y ago
      ...that's rather a different question, I think. Rsync doesn't claim to use a semantic diff.
- zmj 2y ago
  I implemented rsync's binary diff/patch in .NET several years ago: https://github.com/zmj/rsync-delta https://github.com/zmj/rsync-delta It's a decent protocol, but it has shortcomings. I'd expect most future use cases for that kind of thing to reach for a content-defined chunking algorithm tuned towards their common file formats and sizes.

jeroenhd 2y ago

So, anyone got a good resource on why Apple is so afraid of GPLv3? Surely this shouldn't be a problem as long as they statically compile the executables?

pjmlp 2y ago
Not only Apple, everyone. I never worked at any company that allows for GPLv3 dependencies, and even GPLv2 aren't welcomed, unless validated by legal team first.
- jeroenhd 2y ago
  But Apple did ship GPLv2. They're shipping open source tools with infectious licenses like they always did. This isn't like the normal "take someone else's work for free but don't give anything back" approach most companies follow when they decide to avoid GPL code.
banqjls 2y ago
The TiVo clause.
- rbanffy 2y ago
  It wouldn’t apply to the kernel. Also, a lot of the command line tools are not distributed as part of the OS.
  - jhasse 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - Eggpants 2y ago
      lol. You must be a hoot at parties.
    - mistrial9 2y ago
      from the point of view of the GPL side of the aisle, yes agree they are evil. Shareholders who want returns are on the other side of the aisle, so to speak, and definitely see "risk" and "no" when it comes to anything close to GPL. OK no problem, except that the code that Apple Computer profits mightily with, substantially originates in the former. recall the John Gilmore camp handing out "don't tread on me Apple" buttons 35 years ago.. it has been going on that long. Apple knows very well what they are doing.

banqjls 2y ago

You don't have to embed a github gist to show 5 lines of console output that are not even highlighted. You can use the HTML <code> tag. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML

bentley 2y ago
<samp> would be more semantically appropriate.

chasil 2y ago

"...Apple decided that while it could comply with the terms of GPLv2 license with regards to rsync 2.x, it could not comply with the terms of GPLv3 license with regards to rsync 3.x." This is due to the software patent terms that appeared in GPLv3. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21645618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21645618 https://lobste.rs/s/8lbh1k https://lobste.rs/s/8lbh1k https://archive.ph/AeMTz https://archive.ph/AeMTz

IAmLiterallyAB 2y ago
I think its actually the anti-Tivoization stuff that they take issue with
- chasil 2y ago
  The GPL wiki lists software patents prior to the Tivo clauses, and links to this: "Early drafts of version 3 of the GNU General Public License (GPLv3) contained several patent retaliation clauses that varied in scope, some of which were later removed due to concerns about their efficacy. The final published version of GPLv3 contains a patent retaliation clause similar to those in the Apache License and Mozilla Public License, which terminates rights granted by the license in response to litigation alleging patent infringement in the software." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_and_free_software https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_and_free_soft... That would be a significant factor in avoiding GPLv3.

brian_herman 2y ago

Can someone do an analysis of the packages of macOS Sequoia that are still GPL licenced?

haunter 2y ago
I don't know all but the Chess.app is actually one, running the sjeng engine which is GPLv2 licensed https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/Chess/tree/Chess-524.22/sjeng https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/Chess/tree/Chess-... https://sjeng.org/indexold.html https://sjeng.org/indexold.html

tonetheman 2y ago

It has differences in the command lines / behavior. We discovered this last week.

palata 2y ago

Am I the only one finding that "openrsync" sounds like "rsync" is not open source? I find it a bit confusing because rsync is GPL. Just like I would find it weird for a project to be called openlinux or librelinux... Still it's great to have multiple implementations, of course!

ronsor 2y ago
It's called openrsync because it's developed for and by OpenBSD.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- palata 2y ago
  I truly respect OpenBSD, but I hope they won't end up writing openopenssl :-) (I will admit: I had to check and openssh is actually "the OpenBSD Secure Shell" project, so I guess it makes sense :-) ).
  - ronsor 2y ago
    Sorry, OpenBSD already wrote libressl and libtls
    - palata 2y ago
      Well "libressl" doesn't sound like an open-source rewrite of the proprietary "openssl" :-). I don't really get the point about libtls, though. But I get it, OpenBSD has been using Open* as a prefix for many projects, I didn't know it :-).
  - yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
    They called their openssl fork libressl - I assume because of exactly that naming conflict - but most of their "exports" follow the convention; OpenBSD, OpenSMTPD, OpenNTPD, OpenSSH. Possibly others that I don't know off the top of my head.

firecall 2y ago

I feel compelled to comment just to note the vintage WordPress Theme being used! Worth a click just to see how we used to live!

NelsonMinar 2y ago

Does openrsync work? The problem with Apple's ancient userspace is so many of the utilities are outdated and don't support things like files bigger than 4GB. So switching to a tool updated in the last 19 years may be an improvement. But then rsync is such a standard, is openrsync 100% compatible? The need to install and maintain Homebrew was a big part of why I switched from MacOS to Windows. WSL is a very good Unix environment, being just Ubuntu or Debian.

alphabettsy 2y ago
How is maintaining two operating systems simpler?
- tymscar 2y ago
  To me this post can be framed under dissonance in the dictionary. Installing a package manager and a package from it apparently is harder than installing an OS and the installing a package from its package manager. And lets be honest here. It’s not like homebrew is a set in stone necessity. I use Nix, theres macports, you can build the package from source. All with less complexity than running what is in the end a whole os in a vm
  - hughw 2y ago
    I'm mystified at Homebrew's dominance. It seemed to come unglued for me every few months. I switched to Macports years ago and my cli world has been stable and up-to-date.
    - pasc1878 2y ago
      I suspect because users and the originbal auithor did not understand multi user UNIX and so don't like the idea of having to use sudo and also they use Apple tools as much as possible rather than controlling the versions of libraries that they use which would be what commercial users were doing with Unix over 20 years before. It also uses /usr/local which is for locally compiled software so you get in a mess if you have a compiled version of a library that is also in Homebrew. Macports and nix and fink will build under a new user id and install as root as per any other Unix. Thus the build can be controlled to only use known versions of other libraries. Homebrew installs as the current user. - Try using it when you do have multiple users on a mac (which is uncommon).

fmajid 2y ago

Just like they replaced bash with zsh. Most Big Tech firms are allergic to GPL3.

7e 2y ago
GPLv3 is a legal landmine. In fact, GPL itself is wildly unpopular compared to more open licenses. The FSF is getting what it deserve here. Open source predates the FSF and will remain long after the FSF is dead.
- wanderingmind 2y ago
  Can you show examples of impactful open software that predates fsf and stallman?
  - donnachangstein 2y ago
    BSD predates the Stallman Utilities (kernel sold separately) by about a decade.* * in "shared source" form
    - hollerith 2y ago
      The BSD releases did not form a complete OS and were not runnable except in combination with source code from ATT Unix, which was emphatically proprietary software. The first release of BSD that was unequivocally legal for anyone to acquire and run without getting ATT's permission was 4.4BSD-Lite in June 1994. (Yes, organizations did create OSes from BSD Networking Release 2 (Net/2) released in June 1991, but legal uncertainty hung around them for years.) In contrast, by 1984, Stallman had already formed a close working relationship with a competent lawyer (Eben Moglen) to devise a legal strategy to maximize the probability that everyone will continue to enjoy a list of freedoms (chosen by Stallman) around any software put under the GPL.
      - donnachangstein 2y ago
        > but legal uncertainty hung around them for years. I mean if we're going to split hairs and play this game, SCO claimed ownership to alleged Unix code in Linux which wasn't initially resolved until 2008 or so (and further continued for another decade). That never stopped anybody.

numbsafari 2y ago

I stopped treating Mac OS as a Unix and I started sleeping at night. It’s a great platform for running a Unix in a VM.

pjmlp 2y ago
It helps not to mistake UNIX with GNU/Linux, as first step into tranquility.
latexr 2y ago
macOS is a certified UNIX. https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/ https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/ Perhaps what you mean is that the definition of what it means to be a UNIX has changed for you and you prefer to run UNIX-inspired or UNIX-compatible systems.
- numbsafari 2y ago
  I think "certified unix" is meaningless to most people who use "a unix".
  - wpm 2y ago
    I think a lot of people who use "a unix" just use "a linux"

ikmckenz 2y ago

And yet I don't see Apple on the list of contributors of the OpenBSD Foundation (https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/contributors.html https://www.openbsdfoundation.org/contributors.html), shame.

OsrsNeedsf2P 2y ago
The BSD ecosystem benefits from MacOS plenty. Apple doesn't need to be a monetary donator, I for one would be grateful if Apple used my tools at all
- WD-42 2y ago
  Have some self respect lol

Symbiote 2y ago

> openrsync is written as part of the rpki-client(1) project, an RPKI validator for OpenBSD. openrsync was funded by NetNod, IIS.SE, SUNET and 6connect. Could anyone suggest why these organizations would want to fund this development? https://github.com/kristapsdz/openrsync?tab=readme-ov-file#project-background https://github.com/kristapsdz/openrsync?tab=readme-ov-file#p...

jimsmart 2y ago
This comment explains the reason for its existence quite well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43605846 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43605846 Companies fund things because they're useful or necessary. My guess is that some of the companies listed might use BSD — and perhaps wanted/needed an implementation of rsync that was not GPL3 licensed. And/or they simply have an interest in funding Open Source projects / development.
- Squossifrage 2y ago
  Three out of four aren't even companies. SUNET is the Swedish NREN, NetNod is a non-profit that manages Internet infrastructure services (like DNS and NTP) in Sweden, IIS is the non-profit that manages the Swedish TLDs.
  - jimsmart 2y ago
    Feel free to substitute my use of the word "company", with "company / organisation / foundation". Plus others I'm surely forgetting. I meant 'company' in the sense of a legal entity, probably paying some kind of tax, probably having to register/file their accounts every year. Here in the UK, all of these various different types of 'companies' all have to register with Companies House, and file tax returns to HMRC. 'Company' is the overarching legal term here. — But sure, my bad: the post I was replying to actually used a term that is arguably better, 'organisations'. And I should have used that. But my point still stands, whether a private limited company, or a non-profit of some kind, or an organisation, or a foundation, or a charity, or whatever — they're all legal entities of some kind — and they're all able to fund anything they please, if they see value in it. - NetNod is actually a private limited company according to Wikipedia [1]. Corporate identity number: 556534-0014. - Swedish Internet Foundation, formerly IIS, have corporate identity number: 802405-0190 (on their website [2]) - Sunet is a department of the Swedish Research Council, and uses the Swedish Research Council’s corporate identity number 2021005208, according to their website [3] So they are all registered with the Swedish Companies Registration Office. Which I assume is their equivalent of Companies House here in the UK. Maybe if you still think that they're not 'companies' — of some kind — then perhaps take it up with the Swedish Companies Registration Office! ;) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netnod https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netnod [2] https://internetstiftelsen.se/en/ https://internetstiftelsen.se/en/ [3] https://www.sunet.se/en/contact https://www.sunet.se/en/contact

shmerl 2y ago

To not like GPLv3 one has be a DRM proponent. That checks out for Apple. In practice though authors of GPLv3 see it as a clarification of GPLv2, i.e. they should have the same practical intent.

shagie 2y ago
Linus’s views on GPLv3 would be something to watch https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU?si=263GyZd9YaPu4-PC https://youtu.be/PaKIZ7gJlRU?si=263GyZd9YaPu4-PC
- shmerl 2y ago
  I agree that it could be a separate license, but that doesn't really contradict the point that GPLv2 was intended to prevent DRM scenarios that in practice violate basic idea of being able to run the changes. It's a natural thing to want, even if Linus doesn't find it important.

tiffanyh 2y ago

Looks like OpenBSD maintains openrsync. https://github.com/kristapsdz/openrsync https://github.com/kristapsdz/openrsync

emchammer 2y ago
Apple could do worse than importing tools from the OpenBSD Project. Now there are several more commands that would be helpful...

gausswho 2y ago

Should I be embarassed for my bash alias? alias rsy="rsync -avP" I do this with many unix utils that have insensible (imo) defaults

emmelaich 2y ago
I use -i (itemize) or even --ii (itemize everything) rather than -v. Also be aware than -a can conflict with other options -- in classic rsync gotcha fashion.

emmelaich 2y ago

For a while, (up to including Sequioa 15.3) both rsync_samba and rsync_openrsync were available, via /var/select/rsync or the env variable CHOSEN_RSYNC. One particular annoyance of openrsync is that it claimed to support the /./ magic path element for --relative. I sent a bug report to Apple for this about a month ago. rsync_samba is gone as of Sequoia 15.4. I've installed rsync from homebrew.

watersb 2y ago

Patches to mainline rsync added support for extended attributes, particularly for supporting macOS metadata. Bombich "Carbon Copy Cloner" is a GUI app that wraps it. https://support.bombich.com/hc/en-us/articles/20686446501143-Credits#h_01HN3XNGRYMD91E8BQE6JJ56NF https://support.bombich.com/hc/en-us/articles/20686446501143... I started following Mike Bombich from his posts on macOS Server sysadmin boards; see https://web.archive.org/web/20140707182312/http://static.afp548.com/mactips/rsync.html https://web.archive.org/web/20140707182312/http://static.afp... Nathaniel Gray created a testing tool to verify the fidelity of backups; files with multiple streams, extended attributes and ACLs, all the good stuff... Backup Bouncer: https://github.com/n8gray/Backup-Bouncer https://github.com/n8gray/Backup-Bouncer See also this SwiftUI app that wraps rsync, RsyncX. https://github.com/rsyncOSX/RsyncOSX https://github.com/rsyncOSX/RsyncOSX We used to really care about this stuff, back when we were still running software from "Classic" macOS on top of our new UNIX systems. https://web.archive.org/web/20161022012615/http://blog.plasticsfuture.org/2006/03/05/the-state-of-backup-and-cloning-tools-under-mac-os-x/ https://web.archive.org/web/20161022012615/http://blog.plast...

doctorpangloss 2y ago
The problem with rsync is that it is ridiculously slow. IFileOperation (Windows) and FileManager (macOS) will do the most performant copy supported by the underlying FS. Enabling CRC checks is a checkbox in SMB and ReFS - rsync's content matching step is redundant to a modern SMB share on a modern Windows Server. Windows to Windows, IFileOperation will be like 1.5-8x faster throughput with lower CPU usage than rsync, and maybe 1.2-3x faster than doing a file copy using vanilla golang. And if you don't care about the operating systems that actually use all the complex filesystem metadata, if you only care about Linux, then you only need openrsync or simpler programs.

abotsis 2y ago

I continue to be happy that Apple continues to enhance and embrace the posix side of osx vs gradually stripping it away in some kind of attempt to make it more like iOS.

thrdbndndn 2y ago

As a relatively new Linux user, I often find the "versioning" of bundled system utilities also to be a bit of a mess, for lack of a better word. A classic example, at least from my experience, is `unzip`. On two of my servers (one running Debian and the other an older Ubuntu), neither of their bundled `unzip` versions can handle AES-256 encrypted ZIP files. But apparently, according to some Stack Overflow posts, some distributions have updated theirs to support it. So here is what I ran into: 1. I couldn't easily find an "updated" version of `unzip`, even though I assume it exists and is open source. 2. To make things more confusing, they all claim to be "version 6.00", even though they obviously behave differently. 3. Even if I did find the right version, I'm not sure if replacing the system-bundled one is safe or a good idea. So the end result is that some developer out there (probably volunteering their time) added a great feature to a widely used utility, and yet I still can’t use it. So in a sense, being a core system utility makes `unzip` harder to update than if it were just a third-party tool. I get that it's probably just as bad if not worse on Windows or macOS when it comes to system utilities. But I honestly expected Linux to handle this kind of thing better. (Please feel free to correct me if I’ve misunderstood anything or if there’s a better way to approach this.)

lukan 2y ago
No idea, I feel your confusion, I just use 7z and it could handle my zip needs so far (There are always a million ways to do anything on linux). But I assume, you should be able to update unzip without issues. And if no critical service depends on it, just update and see.
- DonHopkins 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - eli 2y ago
    Why the hostile comments?
    - donnachangstein 2y ago

keepamovin 2y ago

Why can’t the developers just release a licensable corporate version and Apple just agree to pay the corporate license fee?

saagarjha 2y ago
Why would they want to?
- keepamovin 2y ago
  Why would who want to? I consider each of the participants below. But first let me answer generally: Why? Because it's right to. If you create good karma, the world will get better. If you do bad things, the world and your world (ie, your karma) will get worse. Paying for software you use extensively is good karma. Not doing so is bad karma that erodes the world (and your world), because it severs the exchange of value and erodes the justice that arises from that, which then reflects back on you inevitably. For the participants in this archetypal case: Apple - because it's not right to not pay the developers of software you use a lot, even if it was released under permissive licenses. Apple paying rsync producers for their software is just and right. Apple wants to be a good company, so they want to do this, too. Plus they could get a tailored custom license that works for them, and gives them standard good rsync. The rsync developers - so they get the just reward for the value they produce, as is right and absolutely correct. They can choose to allocate that however they want, which is them expressing their good interest. What's good for them, is good for what they produce. Everything gets better. Happy cycle. Everybody else - to participate in that just and right exchange of value, which nourishes the good of both the software, the developers, Apple, and everybody else, supporting the karma of the world, rather than participating in an exploitative abuse that erodes it. More generally, using software extensively that is permissively licensed is not piracy, but it has the effect of piracy in that value consumed is severed from value rewarded to the producers. This is fundamentally exploitative and abusive, in the limit leads to poor software quality by eroding productive capacity. One caveat is large well-organized ad-hocracies that maintain giant FOSS projects, like the FOSS or FOSS-like Linux distributions. These are sort of hybrid volunteer, corporate volunteer forces that are large enough to make such fossonomics work. But there's plenty of hyperuseful software built by tiny, single-person or single-company teams for whom those economies don't work as they don't have that scale nor fractional-corp-labor. To conclude: normalize improving the world and spreading good karma by normalizing paying for the software you use. Even if a given developer team is yet to realize how to bank the value they created for you, as a savvy and responsible software consumer it's your responsibility to seek out and initiate opportunities to pay them, and not to seek out what you can take and exploit. If they make payment available, use it. Basically, it's fairly simple. Don't be evil. And respond to and create opportunities to do good!

linsomniac 2y ago

Am I the only one that has had some hard to pin down problems with rsync? I'm excited about this because I'd love to have an alternative implementation. In particular, "rsync --compress" over SSH seems to have a rare and hard to track down issue. I've used rsync for decades doing hundreds of nightly system backups, and maybe once a month one of them goes out to lunch (IIRC it just hangs). The rarity of it makes it hard to isolate or come up with a reproduction. Removing the "--compress" resolves it. Anyone else ever come across something like that?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

system7rocks 2y ago

In general, Apple has had such a positive influence on both hardware and software that I welcome their particular approach. It may not be ideal from a pure Linux perspective, but it does open the door to a variety of approaches. And truly, that is the key - there should always be multiple licenses and approaches to the work of open source. So, thank you, Apple. But please open source System 7.

yonran 2y ago

I ran into this issue too since I implemented an --rsh wrapper script (based on https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/13776 https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/13776) and the options passed to ssh are different (samba rsync passes in -l user host command, openrsync passes in user@host command). > openrsync accepts only a subset of rsync’s command line arguments. I have not upgraded to MacOS Sequoia yet so I cannot verify but from the source (https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/rsync/blob/rsync-91.60.3/rsync.wrapper.c https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/rsync/blob/rsync-...) it appears that there is a wrapper and they ship both samba rsync and openrsync and fall back to samba if you use an unsupported option?

stephenr 2y ago
Interestingly, I see evidence of that wrapper on my Sonoma machine, but `/usr/libexec/rsync/` only contains the `rsync.samba` binary, On my Sequoia machines, there is no `/usr/libexec/rsync`, and the `rsync` binary at /usr/bin seems to just be the regular `openrsync` binary.

pjmlp 2y ago

As I keep telling, GNU/Linux had a lucky moment sidestepping the whole issue of AT&T trying to get control back from UNIX, had this not taken place and everyone would be using classical UNIXes, with some BSD code running on them. You see the same on embedded as well, all new kids on the block as embedded FOSS OSes or bare metal libraries, are either Apache or MIT licensed.

brunorsini 2y ago

After decades using rsync for my local backups, I recently switched to ChronoSync Express. It's simple to use, with a sensible GUI and well-laid-out customization options. And btw, it's included on Setapp subscriptions.

adrian_b 2y ago

Looking at the sparse documentation of openrsync does not create any confidence for me that it can be an acceptable substitute for rsync. In my opinion, any program that is supposed to copy files, but which is not able to make perfect copies, i.e. copies that do not lose any bit of data or metadata that was present in the original file, is just unusable garbage. Unfortunately, most copying programs available in UNIX-like operating systems (and also many archiving programs) do not make perfect file copies with their default options and many of them are never able to make perfect copies, regardless what options are used. I have not looked recently at the scp command of ssh, but at least until a few years ago it was not possible to make perfect file copies with scp, especially when the copies were done between different operating systems and file systems. That is why I never use scp, but only rsync over ssh. Rsync is the only program that I have seen, which is able (with the right options) to make perfect file copies even between different operating systems and file systems (for instance between FreeBSD with UFS and Linux with XFS), preserving also metadata like extended file attributes, access control lists and high-precision file timestamps (some copying programs and archiving programs truncate high-precision timestamps). The current documentation of openrsync does not make any guarantee that it can make complete file copies, so by default I assume that it cannot, so for now it is a program that I consider useless. Beside rsync for copying, one of the few Linux archiving programs that can archive perfect file copies is bsdtar (when using the pax file format; the ancient tar and cpio file formats cannot store all modern file metadata). (FYI: I always alias rsync to '/usr/bin/rsync --archive --xattrs --acls --hard-links --progress --rsh="ssh -p XXX -l YYYYYYY"') (With the right CLI options, "cp" from coreutils can make perfect file copies, but only if it has been compiled with appropriate options; some Linux distributions compile coreutils with wrong options, e.g. without extended file attributes support, in which case "cp" makes only partial file copies, without giving any warnings or errors.)

graemep 2y ago
This is a licensing issue for Apple, and only a small proportion of their users will care about this, and those users will just install rsync.
- adrian_b 2y ago

DeathArrow 2y ago

Is good that we see BSD software thriving.

secure 2y ago

I looked at openrsync when I was writing my own https://github.com/gokrazy/rsync https://github.com/gokrazy/rsync implementation (in Go!) and it’s good code :) It’s a shame that openrsync is not 100% compatible with rsync — I noticed that Apple was starting to switch to openrsync because my own tests broke on macOS 15.

procaryote 2y ago

I already replace the bundled rsync on mac with the proper one, as the bundled one is ancient and is missing some features I like. Same for grep, awk, sed, find Mac OS is getting a bit worse every release, clearly trending towards an iOS world where we have to ask apple for permission to run anything, even in a sandbox

larusso 2y ago

How is it these days for other developers actually banking on certain tools to be present / working. What I mean is that apple isn’t shipping rsync etc to help us developers but because the system needs it. It was already mentioned that this issue also exists for the other cli tools because they ship the BSD not the Gnu versions. Which brings me to POSIX which was introduced back then to tackle just that. Make sure that a set of tools has defined options / behavior etc. it seems to me that we lapsed here because more and more systems ship very custom setups which are not compatible. Or see the Linux and the issue with binary compatibility and the state of flatpack vs Snap vs others. I fear it becomes harder and harder to create cross platform solutions by using the system provided packages. Writing a shell script is already a challenge.

DeathArrow 2y ago

I see most people are discussing BSD VS GPL v3 and some wonder why on earth do we need more than one implementation of the rsync protocol. My view is that having more than one choice is good. It is good for both people and companies that we have BSD and Linux. It is good we have both BSD and GPL. Sometimes, having too many choices is bad because it leads to fragmentation, creates support and technical issues and leads to analysis paralysis and procrastination. But it's not the case here.

INTPenis 2y ago

This hardly matters as any power user will keep their own toolset maintained from brew I guess. And relying on open source CLI tools in Macintosh for helping end users is not a good idea. What this signals to me most of all is "oh we can't steal from GNU anymore so we'll steal from openbsd". Because even if it is a neglible part of the appeal of Macintosh computers, they still make an effort to ship these tools with their OS and they make a lot of money doing it.

simongray 2y ago

I wonder if this is why Time Machine started taking up all my CPU resources after I upgraded? I had to shut off automated Time Machine backups because it literally makes my M1 MBA unusable for few minutes every hour.

SuperSandro2000 2y ago

Yeah, more MacOS utilities that accept slightly different arguments.

latexr 2y ago
Technically it’s a BSD utility, so still open-source and you can contribute to it.

0x0 2y ago

I recently ran into an issue with this because building an iOS .ipa from the command line with xcodebuild apparently ends up shelling out to call rsync to copy some files between local directories, and because I had homebrew rsync earlier in $PATH, it would end up running homebrew rsync, but xcodebuild passed an openrsync-only command line argument "--extended-attributes" that homebrew rsync doesn't understand and would exit with a failure.

egorfine 2y ago

Thanks for bringing attention to it. Did `brew install rsync` immediately, problem solved, fuck Apple.

wkat4242 2y ago

Lol. Apple's war on GPL 3 again. Same reason they replaced bash with zsh. I'm glad I'm no longer using their stuff. And yes I would need a complete implementation obviously.

p0w3n3d 2y ago

Strange, I've always thought about GPLv3 as of an upgrade (i.e. better license) to GPLv2

wkat4242 2y ago
It's an upgrade for us, yes. But not for the companies that want to pretend they're doing FOSS. Like Apple these days. They had a good run where they really were open, like when they created OpenCL and Darwin was kept up to date. However these days most of their APIs are closed and Darwin is always lagging behind. Not that anyone actually uses that anyway, but still..
sbuk 2y ago
It seems to me that it has actually been harmful to F/LOSS in the longer term. Where before, there were companies that were contributing to and using F/LOSS, GPLv3 put a stop to that virtually overnight. Now we see comments like "$MEGACORP should stop leaching" or "$MEGACORP should sponsor/ contribute more" - which of course they did, with time and people before the GPLv3 was released.

maggiepatel375 2y ago

[flagged]

steeeeeve 2y ago

This is one of those decisions that confuses you when you're on a mac and things just don't work how you'd expect.

DeborahEmeni_ 2y ago

Apple's shift away from GPL has been showing for years, so this doesn't surprise me. But dropping rsync 2.6.9 this late without full 3.x support feels like a step backwards, especially for anyone relying on metadata preservation. I get the licensing angle, but the lack of feature parity in opensync might catch a lot of people off guard.

toutiao6 2y ago

[dead]

ernst_mulder 2y ago

Beware if you want to copy files with extended attributes, ACLs or resource forks to another Mac. The short syntax used to be "rsync -Eva" Since openrsync this is now "rsync -va ---extended-attributes" I will need to go through a bunch of scripts now I'm afraid. Bye bye Eva.

kt51 2y ago

It looks like there are quite a few glitches in Apple's openrsync. Deletion of two files resulted in four deletion entries. rsync -av --delete --dry-run a/ b/ Transfer starting: 2 files folder1/file2: deleting folder1/file1: deleting ./folder1/file2: deleting ./folder1/file1: deleting Also, if a directory has extended attributes, `rsync -av --extended-attributes` resulted in `._` folders in the destination directory. It is not an acceptable replacement for the original rsync.

ak007 2y ago

It broke the `--log-files` CLI switch that I used to backup my local files to shared storage :-(. Had to reinstall rsync via homebrew to get it back