On 04/06/2010 10:32 PM, Alexander Samad wrote:
But I would say on encryption and de duplication - why not leave that to the
filesystem - stay focused on what rdiff-backup does best - differential
backups, you can get de duplication, compression and encryption file systems
why not leave it to
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Nicolas Jungers nico...@jungers.net wrote:
On 04/06/2010 10:32 PM, Alexander Samad wrote:
But I would say on encryption and de duplication - why not leave that to
the
filesystem - stay focused on what rdiff-backup does best - differential
backups, you can get
fyi: what is a spare file?
typo that should read sparse file?
(look it up on wikipedia.)
steve
--
___
rdiff-backup-users mailing list at rdiff-backup-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rdiff-backup-users
Wiki URL:
On 04/06/2010 06:35 PM, Josh Nisly wrote:
The more I think about it, the more I think starting another project
isn't an all bad solution - I think we may have increasingly divergent
goals. For myself, having a current mirror is well worth the cost in
disk space; it means that it's much easier to
Hi
rdiff-backup user, part time programmer. I would love to see some more work
on rdiff-backup, love to get some bugs fixed and see some performance
increase, not going to comment on rewrite or fix the current code base - I
haven't really looked at the code.
But I would say on encryption and de
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 06:32:04AM +1000, Alexander Samad wrote:
But I would say on encryption and de duplication - why not leave that to the
filesystem - stay focused on what rdiff-backup does best - differential
backups, you can get de duplication, compression and encryption file systems
why
