On 02/28/12 00:07, Nate Eldredge wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2012, Simeon Miteff wrote:
>
>> On 02/27/12 12:06,
address@hidden wrote:
>>> On
26.02.2012 21:25, Simeon Miteff wrote:
>>>> Hi Folks
>>>>
>>>> I've starting using duplicity (0.6.17 now, via the horcrux wrapper). After a
>>>> lengthly first full backup, I'm now having trouble performing an incremental
>>>> run:
>>>>
>>>> Duplicity faithfully detects all the added/modified/deleted files in the source
>>>> directory (verified manually by watching the -v5 output), then pauses for a
>>>> second or two and proceeds to mark all other files as deleted (which is wrong -
>>>> they're still there).
>>>>
>>>> Any idea why this would be happening?
>>>>
>>>
>>> please attach a -v5 console output of you duplicity run. obfuscate private
>>> strings in it. if output gets too big use pastebin or similar.
>>>
>>> also send the complete command line.
>>
>> Both are available here:
>>
>>
http://pastebin.com/Sv9daYaL
>>
>> With this run I killed it before completion, but it does actually succeed in
>> creating the faulty incremental backup if I leave it alone. By faulty I mean
>> that I obviously can't restore files (from the full+inc chain) that duplicity
>> detected as deleted - but weren't deleted.
>
> I see you are using an exclude filelist. Did it change between the full and
> incremental backups? Files which are included in an earlier backup but excluded
> from a later one are treated as if they had been deleted.