Heres how to find out what is generally more useful: (number of times you use tar/the number of times you use rsync)*100 = how much more useful tar is than rsync. I don't even know what rsync has to do with backups that won't be transfered off the system. Why mention it?
<3 Tom "I use RedHat and you don't! Ni!.. Ni!... Ni!" Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Re: [luau] Next up, back up On Tuesday, October 7, 2003, at 10:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > nifty, but don't you think learning to tarball will be quicker and more > useful to Peter? It's all useful and anything learned is good. I really don't know what is "more" useful. Just offering an alternative choice. > > Peter: >>> As I read your comment it occurred to me that we don't have to backup >>> to another machine. We can just back up to another directory. Our > > give him the old-reliable, tried and true methods like > http://www.faqs.org/docs/securing/chap29sec306.html see how much > simpler > that script is than the rsync script? Pretty much the same features. > > Remember the less services you use, the better (for security mostly). > Personnally I refuse to run ftpd & rsyncd on any of my servers. All > that > rsync crap is ment for mirroring and developers. The same people using > rcp I guess. rsync over ssh seems pretty secure and stable. It works for me. > > I can get the same rsync behavior from RH's ftpcopy package for > updating > of new and modified files on any existing FTP server. After-all isn't > rsync just FTP used a diffferent way on a different port? That's great and not really. I am confused about the refusal to run a ftpd but the preference of using ftpcopy from a ftp server. I don't know much, though. > > Tom --scott _______________________________________________ LUAU mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://videl.ics.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/luau
