Comments on: Backup Bouncer 0.1.2 http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/11/03/backup-bouncer-012/ distraction in action Wed, 08 Sep 2010 11:06:07 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: n8 http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/11/03/backup-bouncer-012/comment-page-1/#comment-20736 n8 Fri, 23 May 2008 02:57:15 +0000 http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/11/03/backup-bouncer-012/#comment-20736 Ah, good to know! I'm happy to add tests for edge case bugs like that. After all, it's easy to get the common stuff right. The true test of a backup solution is how it handles the corner cases. I'm a bit swamped at the moment but I'll add the test as soon as I've got a bit of time. Ah, good to know! I’m happy to add tests for edge case bugs like that. After all, it’s easy to get the common stuff right. The true test of a backup solution is how it handles the corner cases.

I’m a bit swamped at the moment but I’ll add the test as soon as I’ve got a bit of time.

]]> By: Patrick Power http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/11/03/backup-bouncer-012/comment-page-1/#comment-20735 Patrick Power Fri, 23 May 2008 02:22:59 +0000 http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/11/03/backup-bouncer-012/#comment-20735 Hey, backup bouncer is great. Thanks for writing it. I wanted to suggest a test for something that I've seen rsync have problems with: a combined test of hard links and resource forks. As of somewhere late in the 10.4.x series, Apple's rsync would silently ignore the resource forks of files that were hard linked to one another, and it would only copy the data fork. It's been a long time since I tested Apple's rsync, but I believe that librsync is the basis of Time Machine so it might be interesting to see if the bug is still there in Time Machine. (Admittedly it's an edge case that few people are likely to hit, but it might be nice to test for completeness.) Cheers and thanks for a cool piece of software. :-) Hey, backup bouncer is great. Thanks for writing it.

I wanted to suggest a test for something that I’ve seen rsync have problems with: a combined test of hard links and resource forks. As of somewhere late in the 10.4.x series, Apple’s rsync would silently ignore the resource forks of files that were hard linked to one another, and it would only copy the data fork. It’s been a long time since I tested Apple’s rsync, but I believe that librsync is the basis of Time Machine so it might be interesting to see if the bug is still there in Time Machine. (Admittedly it’s an edge case that few people are likely to hit, but it might be nice to test for completeness.)

Cheers and thanks for a cool piece of software. :-)

]]> By: n8 http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/11/03/backup-bouncer-012/comment-page-1/#comment-19921 n8 Sun, 06 Apr 2008 20:21:50 +0000 http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/11/03/backup-bouncer-012/#comment-19921 Thanks. I think that's fixed in svn, but I'll make sure. Thanks. I think that’s fixed in svn, but I’ll make sure.

]]> By: Štěpán Kříž http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/11/03/backup-bouncer-012/comment-page-1/#comment-19920 Štěpán Kříž Sun, 06 Apr 2008 18:30:02 +0000 http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/11/03/backup-bouncer-012/#comment-19920 There is a bug in xattr-util (part of Backup Bouncer 0.1.2): xattr-util r ... produces no output at all. This is on line 29, which reads: write(stdout, buf, ... but should read write(fileno(stdout), buf, ... There is a bug in xattr-util (part of Backup Bouncer 0.1.2):
xattr-util r … produces no output at all.
This is on line 29, which reads:
write(stdout, buf, …
but should read
write(fileno(stdout), buf, …

]]>