Re: [rdiff-backup-users] Re: new windows version

[David Kempe]

Chinook wrote:
> I've since got waylaid on an ObjC task, but at the time I noted that I 
> have Apple's version of "xattr" as well as Apple's Carbon ACL modules.  
> In the ACL modules it specifically notes that some are non-portable.   
> Do you have any intention/leaning towards testing for the OS and using 
> the appropriate imports and methods applicable?

The cygwin NTFS to ACL mapping seems to be a bit broken as of last 
checking. Quite frankly, I don't really have any need for ACLs at this 
stage. The majority of restores are single files or directorys with 
classic style simple permissions. I don't know anyone who uses ACLs alot 
on their data shares, and indeed the only people I do know who use them, 
end up tying themselves in knots with them.


> Also (and you don't have to answer as I'll get back to RTFM and studying 
> the source) I noticed a post today about bootability.  I was thinking 
> (hoping :-) of creating a volume clone with "asr" and using rdiff-backup 
> against such.  This in lieu  of  rsync  and fancy  
> incrementals/snapshotting.   Am I in outer space again?
No I think that might work. From a windows perspective, it looks like 
ASR images are like ghost images. Large binary files really. 
Rdiff-backup works against those files, however don't expect great 
increments sizes - sometimes with these binary formats the diffs can be 
massive. The exchange bkf file from a windows server is one example - 
4GB binary file, add one email and backup again and you get %50 diff. crazy.

dave