On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 19:27:57 +0000 Michael Kjörling <2695bd53d...@ewoof.net> wrote:
> On 22 Aug 2023 14:33 -0400, from cele...@gmail.com (Celejar): > >> Git tends to be very rsync-friendly. > > > > I do something similar - I use syncthing to automatically keep the git > > repositories on two of my machines in sync. rsync may be better, but > > syncthing has more or less worked for me. > > I'm not really familiar with syncthing, but it looks like it and rsync > solve somewhat different problems; rsync being primarily intended to > update one location (the destination) to match another (the source), > whereas syncthing is primarily intended to update both locations such > that they match (but can be run in one-way mode if desired). > > Therefore syncthing would seem to be more analogous to unison than to > rsync. Correct. My use case is two systems both used for development (I work sometimes on a laptop and sometimes on a desktop). I understand that this is not the OP's case and the subject of the thread, and I apologize for the confusion. > I know of rsync's shortcomings in the bidirectional-sync use case > because I looked for a good while for a way to get it to do that > safely, before coming across unison which being designed for that > solved that problem with for all intents and purposes no fuss at all. -- Celejar
