Re: [Duplicity-talk] Re: Announcing Déjà Dup

[Michael Terry]

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Kenneth Loafman <address@hidden> wrote:
> A major command line syntax change was done in v0.4.4.RC4 (2007/10/26).
> You probably should check for that as a minimal version.  In 0.4.9 the
> rsync URL format was corrected.  See the CHANGELOG for details.

OK, good to know, thanks.


> As to progress metering, I'm thinking of a socket interface where you
> would pass in the filename of the socket and duplicity would write
> filenames and other info out.  We'll need to agree on a format, but it
> should not be difficult to implement.

That would be good.  Peter mentioned the difficulty of knowing
particular files were being handled, or even how many volumes would
end up being used.  Knowing such an upper limit would be crucial, as
without an idea of the total scope (total number of volumes), I can't
provide an actual progress bar.  A metric that provides both an end
point and how-far-we-are-now would be most helpful.

The current infrastructure doesn't provide for that, because you can't
predict the eventual tarred size?  Does duplicity scan all the files
it intends to backup before it starts?  If it did, it could provide
progress information in terms of the amount of on-disk (vs on-backend)
bits it has handled so far versus the total.  At least, for full
backups.  I don't know enough about how incremental backups are done.


> Welcome aboard.

Thanks!  :)
-mt