On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 18:06:27 +0000, Steve wrote: > Fair comment... I stand corrected that rsync/rdiff-backup are > appropriate for backup of user files. This issue is an old one of trade > off between being able to make fast backups and being able to recover > quickly. IMHO the dd approach is still valid and useful as it is one of > the few ways to ensure rapid disaster recovery. I agree that an rsync > approach permits more frequent backups to be made for user files. Maybe > a better recommendation would have been a combination of dd to take an > image of the install - then rsync to keep regular copies of user files.
I'd still disagree, rsync or rdiff-backup create an exact mirror of the file tree, so you have a backup that is extremely fast to restore from, especially for individual files. If I want an image of the partition, I'll use partimage as it is several orders of magnitude faster than dd and produces smaller archives. As a backup tool dd is about as friendly as backing up to punched cards :( -- Neil Bothwick Gotta run, cat's caught in the printer...
pgptUH9kNdR6G.pgp
Description: PGP signature
