On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 09:26:10AM -0300, rhatto wrote: > Em Fri, May 11, 2012 at 09:53:41AM +0200, Paul van Tilburg escreveu: > > I actually disagree with #3929 though, now I think of it. The date of > > the daily/weekly/monthly dirs is valueable, otherwise there is now way > > to tell when the backup is made. (At least, I frequently use it to > > check how things are going). > > I would like to know Intrigeri's opinion about that, but generally I think > that leaving the folder dates untouched can led to more confusion than > clarification.
True, but the touching also leads to a loss of information.
Maybe it should not remove the "created" metadata file. That could also
be an easy solution.
So daily.1 has a created, and daily.{2,...}, weekly.{1,...} and
monthly.{1...} has created and rotated. At the moment only daily.* seem
to retain the rotated.
On the other hand, in case of both solutions the rsync handler messes
with actual file/dir stat metadata and not just with stuff under
metadata/; this is was I actually dislike most. When I want to get
something back from a backup made on march 4, I just do "ls -l" in the
backup dir and know what I should use.
> > I would like to try it (and do a diff what the changes are), but the
> > host is unforunately down (or unreachable for me).
>
> Sorry, it was an unexpected downtime. It should be reachable now.
Ok, I did a diff. I have run a version of the rsync handler without:
- the lockfile/pipefail fix,
- the debug-instead-of-echo fix,
- the weekly*/monthly*-dir-touching fix,
- the metadata-validation fix
But the basic functionality (including numerous rotation fixes) is there
and works! I'm switching to your rsync handler just yet until the
weekly.*/monthl*-dir-touching situation is resolved.
Cheers,
Paul
--
Using the Power of Debian GNU/Linux | E-mail: pau...@debian.org
Jabber/GTalk: p...@luon.net | GnuPG key ID: 0x50064181
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
