Re: [Duplicity-talk] Duplicity - What's Next?

[Gabriel Ambuehl]

On Thursday 04 October 2007 09:55:28 Thomas Seliger wrote:
> Gabriel Ambuehl wrote:
> > Isn't this what --archive-dir is good for? At the very least,
> > --archive-dir works for not downloading signatures when you do
> > incremental backups.
>
> Unfortunately, --archive-dir has some issues imho.
>
> I noticed, that part of the metadata files were not deleted after duplicity
> cleaned up old backups. 

Yes, that's not very elegant, but it also doesn't seem to hurt (beyond 
spurious complaints about redundant signatures).

> Also the documentation of "--archive-dir" needs an 
> update. Are the sigs kept only locally? Or locally and remote, but only
> read from remote when local sigs are not available? 

The second (I think). In any case, you need to store them remotely or you 
won't be able to restore very well...

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.