On 08/01/2011 11:24 PM, Joe Steele wrote:
FYI, I had submitted some patches which I think fix the problems with
hard-linked files:
http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?26848
The patches won't correct any issues with previous backups in a
repository, but they should correct the repository going fo
all i can say is me 2 I have asked this question a few times over the
last couple of years, like the idea and the premiss
But nobody with the skills has wanted to take up the job
Alex
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Joe Steele wrote:
> On 8/1/2011 10:29 AM, Robert Nichols wrote:
>>
>> and I wou
On 8/1/2011 10:29 AM, Robert Nichols wrote:
and I would add:
* Correct handling of hard-linked files. This is currently broken in
two places. (1) During a verify operation, rdiff-backup will
complain about a missing checksum for each link other than the one
that appears first in the mirror_metad
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 2:40 PM, D. Kriesel wrote:
> Crash plan looks nice just viewed by its features, not sure if the technical
> quality and stability reaches for example rsync, any experience? -- D.
> Kriesel / dkriesel.com
I haven't used it personally, but a friend of mine does daily backups
Crash plan looks nice just viewed by its features, not sure if the technical
quality and stability reaches for example rsync, any experience? -- D. Kriesel
/ dkriesel.com___
rdiff-backup-users mailing list at rdiff-backup-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.
Thanks for the crash plan hit - I'm definetly going to give this one a try :)
Wojciech Stryjewski schrieb:
>> I also would like to use it in larger scale, as it is - to the best
>of my
>> knowledge - the only free and flexible 4D-Backup-solution. However, I
>
>If you don't mind using a free b
> I also would like to use it in larger scale, as it is - to the best of my
> knowledge - the only free and flexible 4D-Backup-solution. However, I
If you don't mind using a free but non open source program, then there
is www.crashplan.com. Although their business model is providing
online space
On 08/01/2011 08:02 AM, domi...@timedicer.co.uk wrote:
and I would add:
* ability to run a thorough verification of an rdiff-backup archive.
The current verification process is flawed as has been discussed in
earlier threads here. The best strategy at the moment is to run a
verification for a da
> Yes I think rdiff-backup is currently unmaintained.
> Anyone who wants to take it forward (and has the skills to do so
> which unfortunately I have not) might need to make a fork
> (which in due course could become rdiff-backup2?)
> [...]
> There was a discussion a while ago here and there was
David,
On 01/08/2011 10:14, m...@dkriesel.com wrote:
Felix,
Im wondering if there is anyone developing on rdiff-backup atm.
as for me, you are asking the crucial question concerning rdiff-backup.
There has not been a lot of development activity on rdiff-backup in the
recent times, and in add
A note I forgot in my first mail: I recently switched back to a
python-controlled rsync backup because of the issues mentioned in my first
mail ...
___
rdiff-backup-users mailing list at rdiff-backup-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/l
I don't think so, yet what alternative is there which does the same job
as well -- particularly between two linux systems or to a hard drive on
the same system?
Felix Rios wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Im wondering if there is anyone developing on rdiff-backup atm. Have not
> seen so much activity in the cv
Felix,
> Im wondering if there is anyone developing on rdiff-backup atm.
as for me, you are asking the crucial question concerning rdiff-backup.
There has not been a lot of development activity on rdiff-backup in the
recent times, and in addition, there are some fatal bugs in rdiff, causing
f*ck
Hi,
Im wondering if there is anyone developing on rdiff-backup atm. Have not
seen so much activity in the cvs repository. Im asking because im
thinking of using it in larger scale and want to know if there is some
activity going on.
/
Felix
___
rdi
14 matches
Mail list logo
