Joe Shaw wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 4/24/07, G.T.Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> access time == modification time == creation time
>
> Note that ctime is *not* creation time, it's change time. It is set
> any time some metadata about the file is changed (user/group
> ownership, change in access right
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-04-25 at 11:44 +0100, G.T.Smith wrote:
...
> The conclusion I am coming too is the the current time stamping
> mechanism is inadequate for anything but the crudest of time related
> file management, and possibly not even that give
On 4/25/07, G.T.Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Joe Shaw wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 4/24/07, G.T.Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> access time == modification time == creation time
>
> Note that ctime is *not* creation time, it's change time. It is set
> any time some metadata about the file is chan
Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> The Wednesday 2007-04-25 at 11:44 +0100, G.T.Smith wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > The conclusion I am coming too is the the current time stamping
> > mechanism is inadequate for anything but the crudest of time related
> > file management, and possibly not even that given the way some
On 4/25/07, G.T.Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> The Wednesday 2007-04-25 at 11:44 +0100, G.T.Smith wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > The conclusion I am coming too is the the current time stamping
> > mechanism is inadequate for anything but the crudest of time related
> > file manage
Greg Freemyer wrote:
> On 4/25/07, G.T.Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> >
>> > The Wednesday 2007-04-25 at 11:44 +0100, G.T.Smith wrote:
>> >
>> > ...
>> >
>> > > The conclusion I am coming too is the the current time stamping
>> > > mechanism is inadequate for anything bu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-04-25 at 20:22 +0100, G.T.Smith wrote:
> > A good backup program should do all this automatically.
> >
> I theory good, in practice not.. well look at editor example originally
> quoted ... modification time does not always mean co
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-04-25 at 16:36 -0400, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> Neither of the solutions I posted earlier in this thread are dependent
> on timestamps.
>
> iirc: Especially for online backups rdiff-backup mentioned before
> ignores timestamps altoge
Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> > people have pointed me to some stuff on a separate sub-thread which I
> > intend to look at.. and hopefully I can avoid having to write my own
> > solution...
>
> Well, rsync does this kind of decissions, I think. And the sugested
> rdiff-backup improves on it keeping old
On Thursday 26 April 2007 04:50, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> ...
>
> The things is, if the modification time is the same, the file data
> will still be the same
That does not necessarily follow. There is a system call that allows
user code to arbitrarily change the file time (it's used, in part, by
ba
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Thursday 2007-04-26 at 06:45 -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> On Thursday 26 April 2007 04:50, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > The things is, if the modification time is the same, the file data
> > will still be the same
>
> That does not ne
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Thursday 2007-04-26 at 13:52 +0100, G.T.Smith wrote:
> Carlos E. R. wrote:
> > As to backup to DVD, there is "dar" and "kdar". Plus "par", that I still
> > haven't evaluated.
> kdar is the frontend to dar... after looking at it in more depth it
On 4/26/07, Carlos E. R. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-04-25 at 16:36 -0400, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> Neither of the solutions I posted earlier in this thread are dependent
> on timestamps.
>
> iirc: Especially for online backups rdif
On Thursday 26 April 2007 06:43, G.T.Smith wrote:
.snip a lot
> > Neither of the solutions I posted earlier in this thread are dependent
> > on timestamps.
> >
> > iirc: Especially for online backups rdiff-backup mentioned before
> > ignores timestamps altogether
On Thursday 26 April 2007 20:40, Bob S wrote:
> ...
>
> If you need to back up to DVD/CD what about Mondo/Mindi I used to use
> it exclusively for several years a while ago. Now I use Kdar but I
> back up to a spare hard drive.
You should be aware that Mondo is a disaster recovery / rescue solutio
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 20:22:47 +0100
"G.T.Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I theory good, in practice not.. well look at editor example originally
> quoted ... modification time does not always mean content has changed it
> merely means the modification time stamp has changed... it would be nice
Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> The Thursday 2007-04-26 at 13:52 +0100, G.T.Smith wrote:
>
> > Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> >> As to backup to DVD, there is "dar" and "kdar". Plus "par", that I
> still
> >> haven't evaluated.
> > kdar is the frontend to dar... after looking at it in more depth it
> > became app
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Friday 2007-04-27 at 12:50 +0100, G.T.Smith wrote:
> > > became apparent that one would still have move the dar slices to an iso
> > > image and the iso image would then need to be burned.
> >
> > Obviously. But I understand it can burn them in p
Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> The Friday 2007-04-27 at 12:50 +0100, G.T.Smith wrote:
>
>
> I haven't really tried it yet, it is on my to do list. I do my backups to
> other HD and manually to DVD. Not an automated solution.
>
>
>
> >>> A further
> >>> complication is although kdar apparently offers a 4Gb
19 matches
Mail list logo
