On Wed, 7 May 2008 09:57:02 +0200, Dirk Heinrichs wrote:

> > rsync is good, but has its own disadvantages, notably the lack of
> > compression and the reliance on the destination filesystem to preserve
> > permissions.
>
> Can you elaborate more on the latter, please? What exactly is rsync
> relying on and which fs wouldn't meet the requirements.

FAT on an external drive, or some of the online backup systems.

> Reg. compression, I believe there's a stackable compressing (fuse) fs
> one could use.

What is that? I was looking for such a beast a while ago, but could only
find read-only filesystems with compression, like squashfs.

Don't get me wrong, I like rsync and use it a lot, but, like anything
else, it has its limitations.


--
Neil Bothwick

For Sale: Positronic Brain-Found near S.F.-Needs Work