Tino writes:

> BTW: Why would that ease support for rsync 3.x? (Just curious.)

Instead of updating File::RsyncP to rsync 3.x protocol, the idea
would be to use native rsync on both sides of the connection,
and the BackupPC trickery would be hidden behind FUSE.

It's just an idea at this point.  The rsync protocol isn't
documented; File::RsyncP was developed by carefully reading the
rsync source.  It's certainly possible to update File::RsyncP for
rsync 3.x, but the development and testing effort is relatively
high.  Two benefits of using native rsync on the server side are
that a fuller set of command-line options could be used, and the
robustness would be better.  One drawback is the rsync checksum
caching wouldn't work with FUSE.

If I follow this path I would still expect to also support existing
BackupPC 3.x XferMethods, including File::RsyncP (up to its existing
protocol 28).  So in that sense FUSE wouldn't be mandatory.

Craig

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
List:    https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:    http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/