On 11/3/2010 2:26 PM, martin f krafft wrote: > >> I'd run new full backups as soon as practical. That will at least >> fix up anything missing in the latest run which is usually the >> most important. > > Yeah, that's surely a good idea. I was wondering mostly about > cleanup actually. > > I assume BackupPC_nightly removes everything from the pool with > a link count == 1. Hence, the worst that could happen is that all > previous backups would be rendered invalid, no?
Yes, anything that is not linked by a current backup will be removed in the nightly runs. The more subtle problem is that the corruption may have overwritten the contents of existing files - but I'm pretty sure that a full run will detect any content differences and fix things up. There would be a chance that it would miss something if blocks in the middle of a file changed and you are using the --checksum-seed option with rsync, though. In that case it would use the cached checksums appended to the files instead of verifying all the way through. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Achieve Improved Network Security with IP and DNS Reputation. Defend against bad network traffic, including botnets, malware, phishing sites, and compromised hosts - saving your company time, money, and embarrassment. Learn More! http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpdev2dev-nov _______________________________________________ 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/