Brian Warner <war...@lothar.com> writes: > On 2/29/12 4:03 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> >> I had no idea. "man tahoe" didn't explain this :-) > > Yeah, we should make that more visible. docs/backupdb.rst explains it, > in the "Upload Operation" section:
I was being snarky (but was quite serious that I had tried to understand tahoe backup and not known about this revalidation behavior). I think it's a serious bug that 'man tahoe' followed by 'man tahoe-foo' (as directed by 'man tahoe') doesn't have basic usage instructions (in my installation, there are no man pages at all - apologies if that's a packaging bug on my part). Users should not be expected to have a source tree, and all the documentation that they need should be installed and in binary packages (as man pages, or a short man page and an info file). > https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/browser/git/docs/backupdb.rst Thanks for the pointer. I have avoided tahoe backup because 1) it failed to back up for me once and 2) I think the filesystem and the backup control system should be orthogonal, and I haven't seen a good argument why tahoe doing a roll-your-own backup program that is tied to the filesystem is a big enough win to overcome the cost of the coupling.
pgpD24ukpM7ZX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list tahoe-dev@tahoe-lafs.org http://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
