net/rsync: Add back the FLAGS option

[des]

Summary

This restores support for copying file flags and fixes a long-standing
peeve of mine by renaming the command-line option to --file-flags,
better matching the naming style of other rsync options. Full backward
compatibility is maintained, including with older servers.

MFH: 2026Q2

[des]

fix refuse_match

[des]

last remnant of PTS

[rodrigo]

net/rsync/files/extra-patch-file-flags.diff

487

--force switch still exists and has the same effect of --force-delete
so its description in the manpage should be :

--force an alias for --force-delete

[des]

--force

[rodrigo]

Since this patch is larger than a simple porting patch, and given that it is intended to evolve in the near future,
it probably easier to keep it in a separate VCS system to help track evolution and changes.

If you don't mind I can create a separate GH repo for this additional patch, so I don't have to involve yourself
at any rsync update who break things.
BTW, I'm open to other alternatives too.

net/rsync/files/extra-patch-file-flags.diff

479

--fileflags switch was kept in the command line options, which is good to prevent POLA breakage
but we should also keep it in the manpage to avoid users confusion:

--fileflags an alias for --file-flags

[des]

In D57645#1323366, @rodrigo wrote:

Since this patch is larger than a simple porting patch, and given that it is intended to evolve in the near future,
it probably easier to keep it in a separate VCS system to help track evolution and changes.

https://github.com/dag-erling/rsync/tree/des/file-flags

[rodrigo]

Hi des,

Thanks for the github repo, but unfortunately this doesn't include my remarks.
Aside from that I'll be ready to land your changes in the ports tree, here is what the commit will look like (using your current commit):

https://people.freebsd.org/~rodrigo/rsync-flags.patch

Cheers,

• rodrigo

[des]

In D57645#1324358, @rodrigo wrote:

Thanks for the github repo, but unfortunately this doesn't include my remarks.

What remarks?

Aside from that I'll be ready to land your changes in the ports tree, here is what the commit will look like (using your current commit):

That's not how we work. You either approve this review and I commit the change myself, or you run git arc patch -c D57645 in your ports tree and push the result.

[des]

ping

[rodrigo]

pong. Sorry for the delay, I'll try to come back to you by the end of the day.

[rodrigo]

Hi Des,

If initially I was in favor of having the patch from an external source, I change my mind because this may increase the port maintainership complexity.
You have my approval if you want to commit the changes on your own.

cheers, rodrigo