[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Duplicity-talk] Restart duplicity without private key
From: |
Radomir Cernoch |
Subject: |
Re: [Duplicity-talk] Restart duplicity without private key |
Date: |
Thu, 19 Jun 2014 13:13:10 +0200 |
Thanks for a quick reply! My comments are below.
Thu, 19 Jun 2014 12:42:48 +0200 address@hidden:
> > As a compromise, I hoped to use "cleanup" before every backup, which
> > would have enforced a full backup after an interrupted one.
> > Nevertheless, even the "cleanup" command requires the passphrase.
>
> yes every time duplicity is run it syncs the archive dir first
>
> > Why is it the case? A cleanup should only delete remote files,
>
> no idea. Ken?
That should be enough for my use-case. A backup is interrupted rarely
and hence there's no need to resume it. Any help is appreciated!
> > shouldn't it? Is there a way to escape the "interrupted backup"
> > trap?
>
> as a workaround you can delete the unfinished backup's files manually
> on your backend. the files are neatly named with date. run a verify
> afterwards to be sure.
Huh. I feel extremely anxious about executing "rm [whatever]" in the
backup directory using my own (therefore badly tested) code.
Or is there a 100% safe pattern to remove an incomplete backup only?
> also read my other mail about - why i think that duplicity without
> private key is not a good idea.
Could you point me to that email, please? I've read the discussion you
mentioned and yet, I'm hesitating about which exact email you mean.
Radek
[Duplicity-talk] Why 'duplicity without private key' is a bad idea - WAS: Restart duplicity without private key, edgar . soldin, 2014/06/19