As I thought, thanks.
Final question: I've been reading round the mailing list, and read that
performing a full backup to local storage, rsyncing this to remote storage,
then performing incremental updates directly to the remote storage could
cause issues with signatures.
I don't see how this can be, unless the signatures depend on the full path
of the backup directory, or something?
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 7:48 PM,<address@hidden> wrote:
Essentially all duplicity data is encrypted and signed, if encryption is
activated of course. This means nobody can read it. You will get errors on
restoring if it was manipulated.
This makes it ideal for backups on non trusted spaces. But of course this
also means you could loose these backups anytime, so an additional copy of
the backup somewhere else would make sense.
If there is no other way of accessing the repository you can go with ftp.
If there is a more secure way, you should use it, just to not invite
listeners on the line.
So it boils down on how untrustworthy your backup space is vs. how
important your data is ...
regards ede
duply.net
On 16.01.2010 16:35, Chris Poole wrote:
Thanks, I think I'll do this then.
Finally, since the files themselves are important, does it really matter
if
the transfer method is unencrypted? (Except, of course, that the password
is
passed in the clear if using FTP, etc.)
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 12:36 PM,<address@hidden> wrote:
Should work. There are others that backup to file:// and then rsync
elsewhere. These folks usually seem to stick to that route. For
simplicity I
guess.
Meaning, they have a local backup repository on which they do all
duplicity
operations (incl. incrementals) and this is rsynced periodically to the
remote repository.
Only drawback would be that duplicity should not be running while
rsyncing
out.
.. ede
duply.net
On 16.01.2010 13:08, Chris Poole wrote:
Hi guys,
my understanding is that all backup data is contained in files in the
backup location directory.
If I want to change backup directory by moving it somewhere, as long
as I make the equivalent change in my Duplicity script, it won't know
the difference?
My plan is this:
1) run a full backup to a local drive.
2) use rsync to copy this backup directory to a remote host, so it
doesn't matter if I cancel it and start again at some point in
between.
3) change duplicity script to backup to the remote host, which should
now do a quick incremental backup, not knowing that I've been copying
the backup directory in step 2.
Does that seem plausable? Otherwise I'll have to leave my machine on
for several days to run a full backup to the remote host all in one
step.
Finally, since I'm encryting and signing my backups, it shouldn't
matter if I upload to some public FTP server? (I happen to be using
scp to a locked down host, I'm just curious.)
Thanks.
_______________________________________________