[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: cleanup --really-clean ? Re: [Duplicity-talk] Removing incrementals

From: edgar . soldin
Subject: Re: cleanup --really-clean ? Re: [Duplicity-talk] Removing incrementals of old full backups
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:53:54 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1

>> 2) the switch does _not_ clean or delete anything.
> Uh,... strangely named, then ;)

sorry but no ..
duplicity incremental --full-if-older-than 30D
nearly reads as a sentence.. switches/options are inferior to the
commands to adjust their behaviour. Duplicity backup commands do not
delet anything. The only commands to actually delete backup data are

>> 3) there is currently no way to cherry pick delete some backups. If you
>> really want to you can have a look in your backup repository and
>> manually/scripted delete the backups you do not need anymore. The file
>> names are pretty descriptive.
> Hence the need for some kind of delete-old-incrementals command IMHO.

as always, go ahead and implement it or (as you did) file a feature request

>>> I imagined this --extra-clean option was just a kind of rm -f on all
>>> hidden files instead of rm or regular files, and not a specific removal
>>> of only incremental backup files (to take an analogy to unix filesystem)
>> command cleanup essentially deletes metafiles in the backup repository
>> used solely to make incremental backups without actually 'restoring' the
>> latest state and compare it to now. For old backup chains these are not
>> needed anymore, therefore they can be deleted.
>> But ...
>> part of these meta files is information about the files contained in
>> these chains, which is currently necessary if you want to use command
>> list on backup chains before the recent chain.
> OK, so, they are used by some commands, but not needed by the
> restoration, so it is safe (although potentially unconveniant) t oremove
> them to save space.

duplicity will always keep them for the current chain, because you might
try to increment backup to it again. But this said, yes this is how it

> Thanks for the details.
> Best regards,

you're welcome, ede

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]