On 04/17/2009 08:27, Olivier Delestre wrote:
> Hello,
>
> A bug in bacula or misuse, I do not know.
> Let me explain.
>
> I have a folder 1 that is saved. I have a folder 2 that is not.
> The directories are on the same partition.
>
> Execution of a total folder 1 saved in whole
> Moving a file to the folder 2 to folder 1.
> Execution of an incremental, folder 1 is saved without the moving file
> which is in the folder 1.
>
> Bacula uses the ctime, mtime only?
> Is it not a problem of bacula or a misuse or (option)?
> I do not know if this comment v3.0.0 rule. And this is only valid for
> Windows clients ... easy to reproduce and if you have an explain ?
>
>    
http://www.bacula.org/en/rel-manual/Current_State_Bacula.html#SECTION00530000000000000000

Note the third bullet point.  Apparently it still hasn't been addressed 
in v3.0.0.

It seems easy enough to check whether a file has been backed up, but 
with file records having a separate retention time, it could be possible 
for an incremental backup to have no file records to check - just a 
timestamp of the last backup.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and 
around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save
$200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco.
300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. 
Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users