This is to continue my discussion with Carl from: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5448
on methods for hard-linked push backup where the client can't corrupt old backups via attribute tweaking. > > I don't know why one would use "cp -al". I was thinking that the client > > would > > upload to the module and then the post-xfer script would copy the module > > contents to a backup set elsewhere using --link-dest, just as if the module > > were the original source. > > Because I think that one "rsync" run and one "cp -al" copy would be faster > than > two "rsync" runs. > > > > The client may not not be able to write to the previous backup but a > > > buggy or > > > exploited forked daemon could. So I don't think this is a good a solution > > > and > > > is more complex. > > > > As I said, if you do not want to trust a properly configured daemon with > > direct > > access to the previous backup, your alternative is to use a second copy. If > > you have a better idea, I would like to hear it (preferably on the list or > > in a > > separate enhancement request). > > _This is_ my better idea! Fix rsync to not modify files in place without > "--inplace" and never use "--link-dest" but use server side scripts intead. Sorry, I still don't understand what you're proposing. Could you please give a more specific description of the sequence of steps performed when a client pushes a backup? Matt
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
