Gene Heskett wrote:
On Tuesday 20 December 2005 20:35, Daniel Webb wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:48:43PM -0600, Brad Sims wrote:
Why don't you mirror /dev/?
I use udev and /dev/ is created at boot time to the best of my
knowledge
Oh, I am behind the times on that issue, that makes sen
Alvin Oga wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Daniel Webb wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 02:16:29AM -0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
One nit to pick here:
- find | tar | gpg meeets all of my requirements for most all possible
potential disasters and recovery
As I describe on my backup page, that's a t
Alvin,
Thank you, you have answered my question. I apologize for being rude, I
should not have worded it that way.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hiya daniel
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Daniel Webb wrote:
> That's exactly what I'm saying: your tar | gpg methodology has not accounted
> for the chance of a few flipped bits, because if it had, it wouldn't lead to
> massive data loss, which it does. Compressing/encrypting after archiving is
> infer
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 06:36:23PM -0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
> if you don't trust find|tar ... you have major problems with the machine's
> reliability and these brand new commands nobody used for 30 yrs :-)
>
> using any other "favorite backup programs" will suffer the same fate of
> losing "huge
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Daniel Webb wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 02:16:29AM -0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> One nit to pick here:
>
> > - find | tar | gpg meeets all of my requirements for most all possible
> > potential disasters and recovery
>
> As I describe on my backup page, that's a te
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 02:16:29AM -0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
One nit to pick here:
> - find | tar | gpg meeets all of my requirements for most all possible
> potential disasters and recovery
As I describe on my backup page, that's a terrible idea. One corrupt bit and
you lose *huge* amounts o
Joey Hess wrote:
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
I have, in the past, with rdiff-backup to my fileserver (located in the
same room), but that is not a great solution as the fileserver is
subject to the same failure modes as my main machine (fire etc), but
worked fine for recovering from my own
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Daniel Webb wrote:
> I read somewhere that this isn't a problem with rsync, that it only copies
> atomically. So are snapshots even needed if using rsync?
yes... snapshots is needed if rsync doesn't do what oyu want
> I'm curious as to the relative merits of rdiff-backup
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 08:01:04PM -0700, Daniel Webb wrote:
> One thing to consider is that it's safer to use a LVM snapshot while
> copying a mirror. That way it won't matter if the files change during the
> mirroring. This issue won't keep the system from booting, since libc6 and
> such never
On Tuesday 20 December 2005 20:35, Daniel Webb wrote:
>On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:48:43PM -0600, Brad Sims wrote:
>> > Why don't you mirror /dev/?
>>
>> I use udev and /dev/ is created at boot time to the best of my
>> knowledge
>
>Oh, I am behind the times on that issue, that makes sense.
>
>(pull
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> I have, in the past, with rdiff-backup to my fileserver (located in the
> same room), but that is not a great solution as the fileserver is
> subject to the same failure modes as my main machine (fire etc), but
> worked fine for recovering from my own fubars. Its p
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:48:43PM -0600, Brad Sims wrote:
> > Why don't you mirror /dev/?
>
> I use udev and /dev/ is created at boot time to the best of my knowledge
Oh, I am behind the times on that issue, that makes sense.
(pulls out my slide ruler to figure out when it's dinner time).
--
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 05:05:15PM -0600, Brad Sims wrote:
> Now in theory, (I have done the bare-metal restore using mondorescue before...
> so I /know/ that works) the procedure would be restore the system to a working
> state via mondo, log in as root, rsync everything back from rsync mirror. N
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 02:08:40PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> I've got a personal account at earthlink and it comes
> with 10(?)MB of storage that sits there unused. so far as I know its ftp
> only access, though, hence my question earlier in the thread -- is there
> a way to automat
On Tuesday 20 December 2005 2:19 pm, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> I've always worked with the idea of two different kinds of backups.
>
> 1) a copy of the critical files (accounting, databases, spreadsheets
> etc.) that are needed for day to day operations in the event of
> corruption or accid
On Monday 19 December 2005 9:01 pm, Daniel Webb wrote:
> Why don't you mirror /dev/?
I use udev and /dev/ is created at boot time to the best of my knowledge
--
"Last I checked, it wasn't the power cord for the Clue Generator that
was sticking up your ass."- John Novak, rasfwrj
--
To U
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
in response to the whole preceding chain.
I've always worked with the idea of two different kinds of backups.
1) a copy of the critical files (accounting, databases, spreadsheets
etc.) that are needed for day to day operations in the event of
corruption or accide
Daniel Webb wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 12:19:49PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
1) a copy of the critical files (accounting, databases, spreadsheets
etc.) that are needed for day to day operations in the event of
corruption or accidental deletion and the like. These are just copie
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 12:19:49PM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> 1) a copy of the critical files (accounting, databases, spreadsheets
> etc.) that are needed for day to day operations in the event of
> corruption or accidental deletion and the like. These are just copies,
> in my case,
in response to the whole preceding chain.
Arafangion wrote:
On Tuesday 20 December 2005 23:01, Alvin Oga wrote:
automated backup is worthless for that precise reason about corrupted main
systems and there's hundreds of reasons/problems that causes the
main system or backup system to have bad
On Tuesday 20 December 2005 23:01, Alvin Oga wrote:
> automated backup is worthless for that precise reason about corrupted main
> systems and there's hundreds of reasons/problems that causes the
> main system or backup system to have bad data rendering either or both
> worthless
>
> backups shoul
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Daniel Webb wrote:
> In the case you're talking about, I suggest rdiff-backup assuming you can ssh
> to the web server. The downside of just using (automated) rsync is that if
> you get corruption on your main system it may be copied to the remote system
> before you realize
On (19/12/05 19:57), Daniel Webb wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 10:17:31AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
>
> > moving slightly OT, but I was thinking the other day about my critical
> > backups. they arent very big, a few MB. I currently backup to another
> > machine on my network, which
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 11:24:37PM -0600, Brad Sims wrote:
> I have a 300GB external HD that contains a current / with the
> exeption of /proc/ /tmp/ /mnt/ /dev/ and /sys/...
>
> Is it possible do a bare-metal restore using this?
Yes. Like others said, though, you really have to try it to be c
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 10:17:31AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> moving slightly OT, but I was thinking the other day about my critical
> backups. they arent very big, a few MB. I currently backup to another
> machine on my network, which I know is not really secure. (why would the
> fi
On Monday 19 December 2005 11:44 am, Mike McCarty wrote:
> It looks like you also don't have /backup on there. What
> else did you not mention that you don't put on your backups?
Nothing else /backup is a mountpoint for /dev/sda1
> "Can I, starting with a bare-metal machine, do a standard
> ins
On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 12:31:40AM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> Brad Sims wrote:
> >I have a 300GB external HD that contains a current / with the
> >exeption of /proc/ /tmp/ /mnt/ /dev/ and /sys/...
> >
> >Is it possible do a bare-metal restore using this?
> >
> >Also can you think of anything
On (19/12/05 10:17), Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> moving slightly OT, but I was thinking the other day about my critical
> backups. they arent very big, a few MB. I currently backup to another
> machine on my network, which I know is not really secure. (why would the
> fire only burn half the
moving slightly OT, but I was thinking the other day about my critical
backups. they arent very big, a few MB. I currently backup to another
machine on my network, which I know is not really secure. (why would the
fire only burn half the office? why would the thief only take one of
three machin
Brad Sims wrote:
I have a 300GB external HD that contains a current / with the
exeption of /proc/ /tmp/ /mnt/ /dev/ and /sys/...
It looks like you also don't have /backup on there. What
else did you not mention that you don't put on your backups?
:-)
Is it possible do a bare-metal restore usi
Brad Sims wrote:
I have a 300GB external HD that contains a current / with the
exeption of /proc/ /tmp/ /mnt/ /dev/ and /sys/...
Is it possible do a bare-metal restore using this?
Also can you think of anything useful to add to this script?
Have you considered switching to systemimager, d
32 matches
Mail list logo
