Re: [Duplicity-talk] Restart from Last Full Backup

[Alan Gutierrez]

A follow up to this. I wanted to simply add an occasional incremental update to
a large full backup that I never intended to rerun. I've been running Duplicity
from `cron` for a while now and I see that it went and decided to do a full
backup all on its own. Is this Duplicity's correct behavior, to run a full
backup every two weeks by default? I know the obvious solution is to specify
`incremental`, but I'm curious as to whether or not there is scheduling built
into Duplicity.

Also, I've restored on lost file from my daily backups so far. Thank you.

--
Alan Gutierrez ~ @bigeasy

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:15:55AM +0100, address@hidden wrote:
> i'd rather move the "obsolete" incrementals out of the way into a subfolder
> (just in case).
> 
> if they do not exist remotely anymore, your cache should update itself
> automatically. to make sure everything worked out you should doi a verify run
> at least after the first new incremental.
> 
> ..ede/duply.net
> 
> On 25.01.2013 23:25, Kenneth Loafman wrote:
> > That is indeed possible.  Just remember to do it on both the local and
> > remote caches.  And be careful!
> > 
> > ...Ken
> > 
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Alan Gutierrez <address@hidden 
> > <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
> > 
> >     Is it possible to restart from the last full backup?
> > 
> >     I am new to Duplicity. My reasoning is as follows.
> > 
> >     Imagine someone used to be a real shutterbug and has a "photos"
> >     directory that is very large. In the last year, they've learned to just
> >     enjoy the moment they've been given instead of trying to capture it, and
> >     they pull out their camera only rarely.
> > 
> >     They have a full backup that is very large and takes a long time to get
> >     up to S3. Now a quarterly full backup to add a handful of photos to that
> >     full backup discourages running that full backup.
> > 
> >     Is it possible and sensible to instead delete the increments back to
> >     that initial very large backup and do a quarterly incremental backup
> >     that starts from the very large backup?