From: Holger P. <wb...@pa...> - 2013-02-28 04:23:01
|
Hi, yes, I'm replying to a message that's almost a year old - sorry. Roy Keene wrote on 2012-05-16 11:38:17 -0500 [Re: [BackupPC-devel] BackupPCd]: > [...] > On Wed, 16 May 2012, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote: > > [...] > > 1. What is the use case for a specialized/proprietary BackupPC client > > when BackupPC natively supports so many different transfer methods > > now? I want to add a point I find *very* interesting: a specialized client can be made to send the potential pool file (base) name for a file it wishes to transfer. This way, files already in the pool would not need to be transfered over the wire, even if the file does not exist or has a different name in the reference backup (or there is no reference backup). Presuming we're not on an architecture with a broken MD5 library, of course ;-). > [...] > I am willing to let the project remain in its current unmaintained state > forever but I wanted to give anyone with an interest an opportunity to > come forward and take over the project including all the version control > history (which was previously in an internal Subversion repository) as > well as updated links as appropriate. I've wanted to *take a look* at BackupPCd for years now, and still haven't gotten around to doing so. I guess that doesn't really qualify me for *taking it over* :-). But I will keep the offer in mind. Thank you. Regards, Holger P.S.: As far as I can tell, BackupPC 3.2.0 removed support for BackupPCd. Until then it was mentioned in the config file, though not documented as an allowed XferMethod value ... This might give a further hint at the number of people currently using it. |