[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ken Williams) writes: > The thing is, a homebrew backup scheme like this isn't really adequate. > For instance, what if you rsync to a remote server every night, and then > you accidentally delete a valuable file and realize it three days later? > This is why incremental non-clobbering snapshots were created. You'd > have to do a lot of work with a system like rsync in order to get the > same effect.
Some years ago I hacked together a simple system that rsynced to a remote box every day but rotated through ~10 directories one by one. Required much extra disk space; but at the time I had more disks than real backup devices. I made it copy over the previous days backup into the ~10 day old one first to save a bit of bandwidth. (So I just copied changes from the day before). But as you said: The real problem is that those tools don't know about Resource Forks. I think I forgot my powerbook down in the car so I can't look closer, but Doug's suggestion of using ditto (in particular when it gets incremental backup features - thanks Doug!) sounds good. > I'm also willing to pay money for a backup tool that /works/. It makes > me feel better if some company's reputation will be hopelessly smeared if > they release a backup tool that doesn't work. Presumably, people that > make backup tools know more about how to get it right than I do. Except when the backup hardware failed me (die DAT, die) I've been a happy user of Amanda. (Uses tar or cpio, so doesn't do resource forks either). The last months I've been using a small AIT autoloader thingy to backup my workstation boxes in the office (and cvs.perl.org); it's great: http://www.storagebysony.com/products/productmain.asp?id=128 (but doesn't have anything to do with the original question) - ask -- ask bjoern hansen, http://ask.netcetera.dk/ !try; do();
