On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 4:10 PM, <myself...@gmail.com> wrote: > The source would be the first "full" backup. What I basically want is to > eliminate the need for making complete data backups, when I do make a > backup, say, once in a month. Since the majority of data will stay the same, > it makes no sense to wait hours, just to have a difference of few megabytes > (mainly documents, and scripts) saved. > > It does not need to have a GUI, an aptitude like UI is sufficient, but I > really don't want to play with Terminal commands, since I have very bad > experience with this. > > Since I am busy working on other projects (mainly with moving to cloud), and > because I require a tool that I can rely and depend upon, working on a new > GUI for some command-line tools is not an option for me.
I've heard good things about rdiff-backup[1]. Citing from their website: rdiff-backup backs up one directory to another, possibly over a network. The target directory ends up a copy of the source directory, but extra reverse diffs are stored in a special subdirectory of that target directory, so you can still recover files lost some time ago. The idea is to combine the best features of a mirror and an incremental backup. rdiff-backup also preserves subdirectories, hard links, dev files, permissions, uid/gid ownership, modification times, extended attributes, acls, and resource forks. Also, rdiff-backup can operate in a bandwidth efficient manner over a pipe, like rsync. Thus you can use rdiff-backup and ssh to securely back a hard drive up to a remote location, and only the differences will be transmitted. Finally, rdiff-backup is easy to use and settings have sensical defaults. I usually use rsync, but I wanted to git rdiff-backup a go. Haven't done it yet because of lack of time. -- Stefano [1] http://www.nongnu.org/rdiff-backup/
