Why not using rsync with hardlinking? Only costs an inode for like files, takes care of files that have been removed (I don't see rdiff doing that), and is very well understood - you get a 100% "copy" of the directories at very low cost. Over a wireless link I can backup 3-4 gig in 2-3 minutes because 98% of the files don't change from day to day. On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, riccardo wrote:
On Thursday 16 December 2004 11:26, Ti Kan wrote:
Aside from the suggestions already mentioned, also look at using rdist over a ssh tunnel. See the man page for rdist. This would be more efficient than nfs.
RDIFF-BACKUP ______________
Excerpts from the manual mention :- "The target directory ends up a copy (mirror) of the source directory, but extra reverse diffs are stored in a special subdirectory of that target directory, so you can still recover files lost some time ago. The idea is to combine the best features of a mirror and an incremental backup. rdiff-backup also preserves symlinks, special files, hardlinks, permissions, uid/gid ownership, and modification times. ~ you can use ssh and rdiff-backup to securely back a hard drive up to a remote location, and only the differences will be trans mitted. Using the default settings, rdiff-backup requires that the remote system accept ssh connections, ~ "
Version 0.12.6 November 2003 RDIFF-BACKUP(1) Man author: Ben Escoto
_________________ best rgds __________
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
--
Carpe diem - Seize the day.
Carp in denim - There's a fish in my pants!
Jon Nelson