|
|
Why the Time Machine hate?
But even TimeMachine being "prepackaged high-level", it stores files in the most simple and smart way - using the hard links to do incremental backups. You can always find the files straight on the disk.
Why the Time Machine hate?
true, but you can do the same thing with rsync, with more control and more transparency. if control and transparency are what you're after...
Why the Time Machine hate?
Time Machine is two things: 1. a frontend to an rsync-based archiver, and 2. a UI to navigate backups created by rsync.
Why the Time Machine hate?
Well, the problem with this, as I see it, is that I don't know how to use TM as a front end without setting it up to actually start making backups. if you design your own rsync thingee, I can't see any way to get it to work with TM. Plus, I personally use an updated version of rsync (rsync 3.0.x handles resources forks better than the 2.6.9 version that ships with leopard and snow leopard), but I don't know whether TM uses the system version of rsync or its own internal implementation, and I don't know what the changes in options keys from 2.6.9 to 3.0.x (which are noteworthy) would do to TM. that's just one of those black-box problems that comes from working with pre-structured interfaces. |
SearchFrom our Sponsor...Latest Mountain Lion HintsWhat's New:HintsNo new hintsComments last 2 daysLinks last 2 weeksNo recent new linksWhat's New in the Forums?
Hints by TopicNews from Macworld
From Our Sponsors |
|
Copyright © 2014 IDG Consumer & SMB (Privacy Policy) Contact Us All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. |
Visit other IDG sites: |
|
|
|
Created this page in 0.15 seconds |
|