Re: [Duplicity-talk] How about adding option --omit-dir-times?

[Danil Semelenov]

> won't you get a new dir mtime anyhow? as duplicity does not overwrite on restore, you have to manually copy the data into folders , which in turn results in a new folder mtime.

Oh, you right. I should just restore to temp dir, and than rsync back to the root with that -O option.

> well, that's cosmetic and could be filtered when run manually via awk, sed or such.

That's true, again.

Thank you for pointing out! Now I see that this option is not vital, really.

On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 4:23 PM, <address@hidden> wrote:

On 04.08.2013 13:50, Danil Semelenov wrote:
> For my particular usecase of duplicity for backupsit's not the matter of space efficiency, but the matter of consistency of mtimes. I have a lot of small backup archives with few files from file system in each. And every backup archive stores its own mtimes for system directories (/root, /home/user, /usr/local/bin, /etc, ...) Every time I wish to restore archive system directories get new mtime.

won't you get a new dir mtime anyhow? as duplicity does not overwrite on restore, you have to manually copy the data into folders , which in turn results in a new folder mtime.

> Another inconvinience of this workflow is when I run duplicity verify I see a lot of dirs with changed mtimes, while I'm only interested in added/changed/deleted files.

well, that's cosmetic and could be filtered when run manually via awk, sed or such.

..ede/duply.net



_______________________________________________
Duplicity-talk mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk

--
С уважением,
Данил.