Tino writes: > BTW: Why would that ease support for rsync 3.x? (Just curious.)
Instead of updating File::RsyncP to rsync 3.x protocol, the idea would be to use native rsync on both sides of the connection, and the BackupPC trickery would be hidden behind FUSE. It's just an idea at this point. The rsync protocol isn't documented; File::RsyncP was developed by carefully reading the rsync source. It's certainly possible to update File::RsyncP for rsync 3.x, but the development and testing effort is relatively high. Two benefits of using native rsync on the server side are that a fuller set of command-line options could be used, and the robustness would be better. One drawback is the rsync checksum caching wouldn't work with FUSE. If I follow this path I would still expect to also support existing BackupPC 3.x XferMethods, including File::RsyncP (up to its existing protocol 28). So in that sense FUSE wouldn't be mandatory. Craig ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
