[Duplicity-talk] Duplicity Reliability Questions

[Dustin Brewer]

Hello,

I'm trying to decide between using Duplicity and using my own creation of 
scripts + rdiff-backup.

I originally found rdiff-backup, and wrote some scripts to use it with 
gpg. Lets just call my script gpg-rdiff-backup. Here is an example:

To Backup:
rdiff-backup school_work school_work.backup
tar -c school_work.backup | gpg -e -o school_work.backup.tar.gpg
find school_work.backup -type f -exec shred -u '{}' \;
rm -rf school_work.backup

To Restore:
gpg -d school_work.backup.tar.gpg | tar -x
rdiff-backup <Restore commands here>
find school_work.backup -type f -exec shred -u '{}' \;
rm -rf school_work.backup


Now the reason I bring up my gpg scripts for rdiff-backup is because I 
recently found Duplicity. I've found it to work well, but I noticed it 
doesn't seem to be in active development, has less features than 
rdiff-backup (which I may or maynot ever use), and states on the front 
page that there are known bugs.

I wonder, how reliable is Duplicity compared to rdiff-backup? Can anyone 
provide some input?

Some notes about the two that I've made (with regards to the example)
gpg-rdiff-backup vs duplicity:
    * gpg-rdiff-backup has a set of commands (in a shell script) vs a 
single command
    * gpg-rdiff-backup vs duplicity wrt end-filesize is roughly equal 
(~48MB for the example)
    * gpg-rdiff-backup vs duplicity wrt to total-time (for the example) is 
+4 seconds longer for gpg-rdiff-backup.


--
Dustin Brewer
address@hidden
PGP Key: http://www.thenullpointer.net/pgp/