> Words like "fringe", "shenanigans" are pejorative - no matter how you
> couch it. My response was hardly ad-hominem, but rather suggesting if
> you went based on actual contributions to the BackupPC community then
> you would be way more fringe than me -- that's all.

There's a big difference between "that's a retarded idea" and "you are
retarded" no matter how pejorative or inflammatory one finds the word
"retarded."

I don't think the leap from "I'm not sure how common this case is" to "oh
yeah, let's see how much you contribute" was in any way warranted,
necessary, and anything less than a leap to ad hominem.

> Newbie as in new to this community -- no insult intended since all of
> us start as newbies.  You seem to be remarkably thin-skinned (is that
> ad-hominem too?) in seeing insults where none were intended.

Yes, calling somebody "thin-skinned" is also ad hominem, just like calling
somebody a n00b, no matter how affectionately you meant it.

Just because I recently joined this list doesn't mean I'm at all new to
BackupPC.

> It's not settled. Opinions differ and the same issues keep arising. In
> truth, there is no real well-defined long-term roadmap for BackupPC
> and Craig is the ultimate arbiter based on his time and preferences
> since almost all of the coding is done by him. Whether this is good or
> bad is for another discussion. But the result is that such discussions
> don't truly get resolved in any public way but they are hopefully healthy
> nonetheless in terms of giving input to Craig and exploring potential
> solution paths.

Therefore, one would think that if a particular solution or technical
point had merit, it would be worthy of rehashing.

> Familiar as a user or as a developer? The issues we are discussing go
> way beyond the Unix 101 concept of "hard links" and have to do with
> the detailed implementation of things like attrib files and potential
> extensions to ACL's and extended attributes. If you are familiar with
> the code and know how to do this best, then please share with us.

I'm familiar with the code.  How to do *what* best?  I feel we've gone all
over the place, from attempting to solve a problem in copying a NAS
volume, meandering over to a documentation issue, and now trying to solve
a vague kind of problem with ACLs that I've also not experienced.

> I have already mentioned this multiple times:
> Attrib files are:
> 1. Slow/inefficient/scattered
> 2. Kludgey/difficult to extend to ACL's and extended attributes
> 3. Fragile and disconnected from the file source (non-atomic also)
> 4. Require kludges like file name mangling
> 5. Handle hard-links in a non-symmetric manner
> 6. Contain redundant information
>
> Not all of these need to be solved but many if not all of them would
> be solved by a database approach.
>
> #2 is a real show-stopper if you want to back up a Windows system
> properly.

#2 is interesting in and of itself, since ACLs are to some extent
arbitrary attributes that can be associated with a file, and differ from
operating system to operating system and from file system to file system. 
Before we get too far on how best to store ACL's, first let me ask, how do
we intend to *retrieve* them?



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
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/