On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 22:52, Craig Barratt wrote:
> That's right. Getting rsync hardlinks tested and released is
> more important. Plus, with Roy's development of a BackupPC
> client (which will handle ACLs and a bunch of other things),
> tar is lower priority.
Hmmm, I wonder if there is any chance of getting the backuppc
client's features rolled into rsync itself. ACLs/open file
handling would be just as important there and a client
that can't compare to the previous run is always going
to have trouble getting old files under renamed directories
in incrementals - or back-dated files on filesystems that don't
keep separate ctimes.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
