On Mon, 13 Mar 2023 at 12:50, David Thorburn-Gundlach <davidtg-robot@justpickone.org> wrote:
I don't know too many use cases for using rsync to transfer files around(*) on local disk
Just for what it's worth, this is one of those lines in an email where my eyes went wide and my eyebrows shot up. In British English usage, I boggled briefly. I use `rsync` far more locally than I ever do across networks, and that's been the case since I discovered the tool in the 20th century some time. (It appeared in 1996 AFAIK.) I use it for copying stuff onto external drives for backups. I use it for copying files from an account I'm about to delete into another account, and for keeping stuff synched across different user accounts. I use it for getting stuff back off backup disks. I use it for setting up new PCs when I want to keep some of the files from an old machine. The big win for rsync is that if something is missing or can't be read or something, it keeps going. You can take stuff from 2 dissimilar sources and conslidate into one. You can update an old backup with new _and changed_ files without recopying old ones that haven't changed. For me, it's far more useful locally than it's ever been across a network. I do also use across networks, but never via its own protocol, which is a pain in the neck to configure. I use it for copying files to my NAS boxes, or from one NAS to another. I use it to copy files from one workstation onto another: I mount a drive share on the remote -- typically by SMB because it just works -- and use rsync to copy the new or changed stuff only. This has been one of those surprising moments when you find that your primary use for a tool is one that hasn't even occurred to someone else as being a use case at all. -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lproven@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lproven@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven IoM: (+44) 7624 277612: UK: (+44) 7939-087884 Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053