Many thanks Steve for the advice. I have them backed up onto two separate portable hard drives at the moment, but i like the sound of your idea.
My wife is a well known woodturner, and If I lost her photographic collection of her turning I think it would be an instant divorce, and I am far to old for divorce. I like the thought of opening a gmail account perhaps under the name of bin laden? Again many thanks to all of you for your help regards Chris Thomas On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 10:18 +1300, Steve Holdoway wrote: > Hey Chris, > > As a backup to your backup, you may consider using your gmail account and > emailing them to yourself... if you have broadband available as I expect that > it'll be a fair bit of data. > > ( As an aside, image formats are as compressed as they can be already, so > zip/tar/gzip/bzip2 etc are only useful for organizational purposes, not > saving space ) > > The chances of losing the primary system, your backup and google mail at the > same time is pretty small. Well, if it happens I expect that your files will > be the last of your worries! > > OK, the FBI and all will be looking at them, so add in a few spicy ones to > cheer them up (: > > Cheers, > > Steve > > On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:02:27 +1300 > chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Thank you again Nick. > > At my age it is difficult to sort the sheep from the goats. > > > > I did not understand that tcp/ip was in fact a network protocol. > > > > I will run a google. > > Thanks to you and all the other cluggers for your help in my small > > crisis > > My wife's files and wood turning photographs are now safe on the > > portable hard drive; well as much as can be, and the systems have been > > backed up. > > > > I am very grateful for all your help and good will > > > > regards to all Chris Thomas > > > > On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 08:46 +1300, Nick Rout wrote: > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeroconf > > > > > > Any basic text on TCP/IP > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:03 AM, chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Thank you. I have the system up now and running thanks to the help > > > > offered from clug members. > > > > Can you point me to some reading regarding the points you have raised. > > > > > > > > Regards Chris Thomas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2008-11-23 at 14:59 +1300, Eliot Blennerhassett wrote: > > > >> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Nick Rout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > 169.254. etc is not a real IP address. It is one allocated by > > > >> > zeroconf > > > >> > or similar when you cannot get a real world ip address. Set them to > > > >> > 192.168.1.x > > > >> > > > >> If all these machines are running zeroconf, and there is no DHCP > > > >> server active, then they will probably already have given themselves > > > >> link-local addresses and names. > > > >> > > > >> As Nick says, the IP addresses will be something like 169.154.x.y > > > >> > > > >> Whether you use DHCP, static addressing, or zeroconf, the machines > > > >> should be reachable by name where the names will be <hostname>.local > > > >> E.g. machine1.local laptop.local etc. No DNS server should be > > > >> required. > > > >> > > > >> regards > > > >> > > > >> Eliot > > > > > > > > > > > >
