Wow, sorry it's taken this long to respond. I just began a new job, and
it's been very hectic around here!
I will try to respond to your questions below:
Joe Krahn wrote:
IMHO, it would be nice if:
1) The output of rsync was sent to a log file.
I agree completely. The issue here is that rsync is being invoked by the
system() command in Perl. In order to make this a reality, rsnapshot
probably needs to fork off the rsync process, read STDOUT from rsync
into a buffer, and relay it to the real STDOUT and optionally the log
file. So far, I haven't had time to get around to this. Want to help? :)
The other benefit of forking rsync as a seperate process is that it
enables the way for parallel backups (with a configurable number going
at once), another feature I'd love to have in rsnapshot.
2) I would prefer an organization of BACKUP_DIR/hostname/daily.0 instead
of BACKUP_DIR/daily.0/hostname (not as important)
People seem divided on this issue. I definitely see where you're coming
from. If people overwhelmingly prefer this, we could see about changing
this in a future major release.
3) It seem that requiring tab-delimiters in the config file is an
unnecessary complication, partly because mandatory tabs is not the norm
for config files.
I agree here also. This has been discussed before on the list. The
reason it is this way is to easily support a wide variety of filenames
without quoting issues (like backing up "windows_share/Some Goofy\"
file"). I would like to remove the tab requirement, but don't want to
add non-standard Perl modules (to avoid complicating the install, which
is very easy right now), and want to handle as many filenames as
possible. Any suggestions?
4) The config file automatically copies the root path name in the
destination path. The documentation should make it clear that in the
case of a root directory, this does not work, and you have to add a
subdirectory name. Alternatively, rsnapshot could append a name in this
case, such as "root/".
Can you give a specific example of this? I think I understand, but don't
want to guess incorrectly.
Should I just go ahead and tweak rsnapshot, and send in suggestions as
Patches are _always_ welcome It's good to get a description of the
proposed change first and maybe some discussion on the list first,
especially if it's a change that has far reaching implications.
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
rsnapshot-discuss mailing list
rsnapshot-discuss < at > lists.sourceforge.net