On 08/29/2019 02:04 AM, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
Hi,
Richard Owlett wrote:
Why is xorriso more appropriate for *MY* _stated_ immediate goal?
I think there is some confusion about my short AND long term goals.
Yesterday I said:> What I wish to do immediately is archive for
posterity the contents of
my hard drives before wiping the drive and starting fresh.
That matches " *MY* _stated_ immediate goal"
Also I had said:
Today I'm only concerned with "archive for posterity" issues.
Thus specifying one *.iso for each partition.
Backups in sense of needing a sequence of backups when typing/revising
chapters of _Magnus Opus_ is for future consideration.
That attempted to emphasize the difference between my "short term goals"
and "long term goals"
Also people tend to _assume_ that I use computers how they do for the
same reasons they do. NOT <ROFL>!
From 1961 to ~2011 I was a rather typical computer *USER*.
I got tired of M$ thinking they knew more about my goals than I did.
Decided to try Linux. Linux From Scratch and Slackware were attractive
for their customization potential. But I was involved in a couple of
volunteer projects requiring commonality of tools. Settled on Debian.
Now my usage fit in two categories.
1. A reasonable match for the "typical" home user. Correspondence.
Also Web searches - the WEB has replaced my local library when I
have a question.
2. That everyone with a PC at home, to some extent, has to act as a
System Administration has lead to a fascination with "how does that
work?" Now I have several computers that any E.E. student of the
60's would recognize as lab benches.
The first requires no local back up as what I do either generates a
physical paper trail or I'm communicating with a mailing list or USENET
group which maintains their own archives.
The later has current need for "an archive for posterity" so that if my
experiments on what should my systems look like go belly up it will be
trivial to come back to now.
Things requiring incremental backups or similar a are a future issue.
This is not decided yet.
For the above reasons I will be focused on what I refer to as "archiving
for posterity".
We have the proposal to use xorriso with incremental backups on some
raw storage devices or on some data files in filesystems on backup disks.
That's future, not now.
We have the proposal to use rsync on backup disks where trees of the
original disks get mirrored to backup trees. Typically with the same
filesystem type as on the original disks.
The main difference between both proposals is in ithe intrinsic backup
fidelity of copying between filesystems of the same type (rsync wins) and
the capability of incremental backups to retrieve the original state of
each update stage of the backup. I.e. you can mount the backup of each day,
compare it with other days, or retrieve a file state which has already been
replaced by several subsequent backups which recorded the already damaged
file. (xorriso wins here.)
But the backup fidelity of xorriso is high, and rsync could copy to backup
filesystems which are capable of snapshotting their older states.
So it is still undecded.
... and some other backup systems have not been mentioned yet >
Have a nice day :)
Thomas
