On 3/16/19 1:39 PM, Andrew David Wong wrote:
I agree that backups are the best assurance, but this is in no way
Qubes-specific. I'd say the same thing about any operating system.

However, Qubes does require the use of snapshot-capable storage for
reasonable efficiency and this is not yet Linux' strength.


Here's where Chris and I disagree. I've been using Qubes' built-in
backup functionality for many years to great effect. Granted, I
usually run it overnight, so time and system load aren't concerns for
me. It just depends on your needs.

I was probably too vague here. The idea was that, apart from the issue of backups, storage integrity on a Linux COW layer (Thin LVM, Btrfs) isn't regarded as top-notch. But I think this is more true of Thin LVM than Btrfs. Someone wishing to guard against data loss on their Qubes+Linux system in the first place (which seems to be an issue for John) could be excused for thinking their options are not the best.


--

Chris Laprise, tas...@posteo.net
https://github.com/tasket
https://twitter.com/ttaskett
PGP: BEE2 20C5 356E 764A 73EB  4AB3 1DC4 D106 F07F 1886

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to qubes-users@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/bc140a0f-0ba9-79db-321a-42be5f8a8c03%40posteo.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to