Le 19 juil. 08 à 20:13, Matt McCutchen a écrit :
On Sat, 2008-07-19 at 15:45 +0200, Mac User FR wrote:
In another hand, don't you think we could add the content of this
script (revised, of course) to make rsync a complete incremental
backup solution without needing 3rd part software? Isn't a good idea?
Why? The goal of rsync is to copy files, not to be a complete
incremental backup solution by itself, even though several of its
options are motivated by this use case. I think the current state of
affairs with a wide variety of available rsync-based backup solutions
(rsnapshot, dirvish, ccollect, various homegrown scripts including
yours, ...) is just fine. Different users prefer different solutions,
so I don't think arbitrarily choosing one to include in rsync would be
appropriate.
Matt
OK, I though you though this way. I'm not wanting to impose my script
particularly, just thinking about people with less computer skills
than ours. Making things easier for them. This is not my case, I'm not
afraid about coding some stuff like I did for Panther being able to
save resource forks or now putting hands to work to get an incremental
backup. But I'm sure some people would enjoy a free, open source
solution to make those incremental backups out of the box.
I understand that this isn't the goal of rsync. I'm only pointing this
because the adaptation would only take few code lines and I think
rsync worth this, as an option --incremental or something like that
that people are not obligated to use by default. If you still think
rsync don't need it, the solution would be giving another name for the
moded rsync. Unfortunately I can't help going this way. I could have
some time to code this feature inside rsync, but maintaining a
parallel program takes too much resources for me.
Best regards,
Vitorio--
Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list.
To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync
Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
