On August 13, 2024 3:28 pm, Fiona Ebner wrote: > [snipped..] > Container mechanism 'directory': > > The backup provider gives the path to a directory with the full > filesystem structure of the container. > > Container mechanism 'directory': > > The backup provider gives the path to a (potentially compressed) tar > archive with the full filesystem structure of the container.
this seems duplicated or wrongly copy-pasted? it might make sense to describe in more detail how the directory/tar should look like - mapped users (guest view, not host view, like we do) - what does "full filesystem structure" mean? (rootfs + all persistent mps in one hierarchy, with no top-level dirs that need to be stripped) left some comments on the individual patches, the big picture looks good to me. I do wonder whether we want to support the Borg and Example plugins though? if not, it might make sense to not ship them (but maybe just test them?).. there's a pretty tight coupling between storage plugin and backup provider plugin - that might lead to some complaints (e.g., I can imaging quite a few backup providers that just require some local file system for temp storage, and users wondering why they can't just enable that for an existing dir storage). it does make some things easier though, so I am not sure we need to change that, just wanted to draw attention to it. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
