#182894 sitecopy: needs reenforcing against 2nd instance of itself

Package:
sitecopy
Source:
sitecopy
Description:
program for managing a WWW site via FTP, SFTP, DAV or HTTP
Submitter:
Dan Jacobson
Date:
2015-03-20 05:21:04 UTC
Severity:
wishlist
#182894#5
Date:
2003-02-28 07:36:58 UTC
From:
To:
I don't believe sitecopy uses lockfiles, as there is seemingly nothing
preventing a user from forgetting he has started one sitecopy already,
with disastrous results.... as (which can be seen from just sitecopy
sitename, also a real scare), it thinks everything needs to be updated.
#182894#10
Date:
2003-03-01 15:12:52 UTC
From:
To:
Hello,

I am using sitecopy now for a while

Is it possible to replicate data following a md5 check, in case of using a
check on the time stamp. In my case all data in the directory is generated
each time, where through a md5 check is more handy.

Regards,

Mike Wes
#182894#15
Date:
2003-03-05 20:52:58 UTC
From:
To:
You've sent this upstream once already, and I still haven't fixed it,
no.
#182894#22
Date:
2007-10-17 12:08:36 UTC
From:
To:
Hi,

Is this bug: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=182894

"sitecopy: needs reenforcing against 2nd instance of itself" occurs
with sitecopy's latest version, 0.16.3-11 or latest -12 in Debian?
Just pingging old bug(s).
#182894#27
Date:
2007-10-18 18:29:18 UTC
From:
To:
Thanks, however I dare not test if the bug is still there, as I would
certainly damage my website. Please test it for me.
#182894#32
Date:
2008-02-06 11:07:37 UTC
From:
To:
forcemerge 182894 129330 141178
thanks

The following three bugs should all be merged together, they have the
same root-cause as upstream suggested.

#182894: sitecopy: needs reenforcing against 2nd instance of itself
#129330: sitecopy: inadequate locking causes data corruption/loss
#141178: sitecopy: Running multiple instances screws up xml configuration file
#182894#39
Date:
2008-02-26 13:13:30 UTC
From:
To:
forwarded 129330 Joe Orton <joe@manyfish.co.uk>
forwarded 141178 Joe Orton <joe@manyfish.co.uk>
forwarded 182894 Joe Orton <joe@manyfish.co.uk>
stop

Already forwarded to upstream. Adding appropriate action on it!
Thanks!
#182894#50
Date:
2015-03-20 05:14:34 UTC
From:
To:
Sehr geehrter Kunde,

Ihr Kreditinstitut hat die Lastschrift zurück gebucht. Sie haben eine offene Rechnung bei GiroPay GmbH.

Aufgrund des bestehenden Zahlungsausstands sind Sie verpflichtet außerdem, die durch unsere Inanspruchnahme entstandenen Kosten von 23,56 Euro zu bezahlen. Wir erwarten die Überweisung zuzüglich der Zusatzgebühren bis spätestens 24.03.2015 auf unser Girokonto. Namens und in Vollmacht unseren Mandanten ordnen wir Ihnen an, die offene Gesamtforderung schnellstens zu bezahlen.

Es erfolgt keine weitere Mahnung. Nach Ablauf der Frist wird die Angelegenheit dem Staatsanwalt und der Schufa übergeben. Die detaillierte Kostenaufstellung, der Sie alle Positionen entnehmen können, fügen wir bei. Für Rückfragen oder Anregungen erwarten wir eine Kontaktaufnahme innerhalb des gleichen Zeitraums.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Rechtsanwalt Slakany Robin