3rd October 04:05
Here's the poor man's version of it that i've tested.
Pro : Like Ghost/Ghost for Unix but is actually on Linux. You can use
distros like Knoppix / UltimateBootCD, etc. supports gzip/bzip2 and can
restore to where you want. (Note : If the restore partitions are
different in size, will have to use fdisk to _fix_ it)
Cons : Most likely hav to be off-line. Meaning, Boot into the CDrom and
then partimage away.
Pro : Can be done on a Live-filesystem. (use nice -n 19) Backs up
everything incl the kitchen sink. Can be used as incremental backup.
Cons : Errr..err... Slow when using it 1st time. (refer to item 3 for
Pro : Faster than rsync when doing it the 1st time. ( tar lcf - . | ( cd
/path/to/new-location; tar xvpf - ) Can be safely stored into
Cons : No incremental backups. (unsure)
Pro : Roughly same function as the above. Suitable for 'poor-man's raid'
Cons : Resource intensive.
Of the above, I still think rsync is the best for your needs.
There's also http://www.dirvish.org, and
rsync/dirvish is fast, inexpensive, and restoring single files or
subsystems is random access and dead easy. With some advanced
preparation, I can restore an exact image of my server hard drive with
a reboot and about a minute of typing, followed by the time required
to copy a disk image - 2 hours for 80gb in my case. I can very easily
combine restores, using (for example) a two-week-old base, then
upgrades, then yesterday's user files, to recover from a system crack.
All from one script, off the same backup drive.
Ow Mun Heng
Fedora GNU/Linux Core 2 on D600 1.4Ghz CPU kernel
Neuromancer 10:30:56 up 1:25, 8 users, load average: 2.14, 2.30, 2.02
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list