On 1/21/2010 10:50 AM, Tino Schwarze wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 10:31:26AM -0600, Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote:
>
>> I came to the conclusion that tar was actually a faster way to do backups on
>> the local system. Less CPU usage, and bandwidth is not a problem. YMMV.
>
> But tar comes with a price: If you extract an archive, therefore
> creating files with ctime in the past, they won't get picked up by
> incremental backups.
>
> I suppose, you already knew that...

Most systems can't backdate ctime, only mtime, so you could fix that 
with the right arguments to gnutar.  The part you can't fix easily is 
where you rename a directory and want to pick up the old files below it 
in their new location.  Gnutar's --listed-incremental mode will handle 
that but requires some file manipulation to work.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell AT gmail DOT com




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Throughout its 18-year history, RSA Conference consistently attracts the
world's best and brightest in the field, creating opportunities for Conference
attendees to learn about information security's most important issues through
interactions with peers, luminaries and emerging and established companies.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsaconf-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
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/