On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Kapil Hari Paranjape<[email protected]> wrote: > > You seem to have missed "duplicity" which has some nice aspects: > 1. It uses cached metadata to decide what to backup. > 2. It saves things as compressed tar so that you do not run > into file inode issues. > 3. You can encrypt backups. So backups to remote machines are safe. > > The main drawback of duplicity is that the _first_ run (where it > builds the metadata tables) takes a long time. This is also the > drawback of the other rsync based systems.
How right you are? This article throws more light. http://www.bitflop.com/document/75 Actually I dismissed duplicity due to some important reason and stuck to rdiff-backup. But I gave up on the project later. And this was a long time ago. I don't think delay in building the first backup is a big issue. Any installation for that matter takes time. So it should be fine. I did run into the restriction of rdiff-backup wanting the same version of rdiff-backup at both ends. What tool you choose depends on what you are looking for. Different tools offer different solutions. And different compromises. -Girish _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, email [email protected] with "unsubscribe <password> <address>" in the subject or body of the message. http://www.ae.iitm.ac.in/mailman/listinfo/ilugc
