Home | News | Download | Packages | Forum | Wiki | Github

Void system cloning/snapshot


Again, no, I’ve got this with rsync and this script (not my creation):

#Home Backup Script
#Todays date in ISO-8601 format:
DAY0=`date -I`
#Yesterdays date in ISO-8601 format:
DAY1=`date -I -d "1 day ago"`
#The source directory:
#The target directory:
#The link destination directory:
#The rsync options:
OPT="-avh --delete --delete-excluded --exclude="burak/.cache/" --exclude="burak/.thumbnails/" --link-dest=$LNK"

#Execute the backup
rsync $OPT $SRC $TRG

#90 days ago in ISO-8601 format
DAY90=`date -I -d "90 days ago"`
#Delete the backup from 90 days ago, if it exists
if [ -d /mnt/Elements2/Backups/$DAY90 ]
rm -rf /mnt/Elements2/Backups/$DAY90

Yet, I’ve once lost a document I’ve been working on because the very dirty electricity (here) had started to breake my hard drive without any warning and rsync had backed that broken file system up.

Are those tools good enough for such cases? Otherwise rsync together with that script and cron/systemd works perfectly, at least for a simple job like mine.

I use another, not scheduling, rsync for the OS cloning as outlined above.


Yes, don’t do that.

If you want to know why, go read the respective documentation.

Please don’t promote rsync as a backup tool.

(rakor) #23

@fluxboxer I think you can build a reliable backup using rsync. But in this scenario is rsync just a tool you use to build your backup around. You need other tools around to have a full-featured-backup (as said there are other isses to adress aswell - checksumming, etc).

With a real backuptool, you have all inside and don’t need to bother if you have build your backup right. Just if you handle the tool well.

So yo can not say you add extra complexitiy with backuptools. The truth is the opposite. Those backuptools take the complity four you.


Only thing bothering me is that disc failure story and I can’t see (and you don’t point out) how can any of those tools can be any better than rsync in such a case. Only precaution I can think of is using smartctl periodically, though it’s not absolutely reliable either I gather.


I could go into detail, but you’re only defending the system you’re familiar with. I could ‘point out’, but you’ve been pointed to documentation.

Tell me, how does your ‘system’ handle files that were deleted and need to stay deleted? not that it would affect maildirs, service files, git repositories, who knows what else.

Please stop promoting rsync as a backup tool. The fact that you don’t see the problems that exist in such a context does not mean they are not there. You are not qualified to give advice on this topic, cold, hard truth.

(Erin) #26

This is just a forum on the Internet. Everyone please calm down.


I’ve been perfectly calm and reasonable, but this

is just infantilism, to say the least.


I formally apologize, I didn’t know this was a ‘safe space’ where people’s skills can’t be questioned since it’s interpreted as an insult. I wish you all good luck with Void.


Previously discussed.



I think this thread has been butchered by unsubstantiated allegations and claims which seems to be a disservice to users. So I need to make some clarifications.

But before that I want to clarify this:

Sero or others, please correct me, correct me bluntly, for instance by saying “Your guide is wrong, very dangerous, because…”, but don’t try to patronize or censure me by saying “Please, don’t say this, don’t say that”. And don’t try to shout down me. Just tell us what you know, as I tell what I know however little it may be. In short, behave with a minimum civility as you would in a face to face encounter.

And don’t make unsubstantiated claims. If you really know the shortcomings of rsync and advantages of others, don’t just talk about them, but show us clearly, convincingly. While doing that don’t forget to inform the Arch Wiki admins about those shortcomings or dangers of rsync as that highly regarded source “promotes” rsync for “Full system backup”!

Now, there’re obviously too many back up solutions and tools, some very comlicated. Before settling on rsync as told in Arch Wiki I’ve looked (though not very deeply) at some of them including two of the above mentioned and none of them seemed better or easier than rsync for my needs. I gather they or other tools have merit and might have advantages over rsync, yet again, for my simple needs rsync was absolutely fine.

I’ve been using it for around two years or more without any issue of its own to cover my two needs:

  1. Full incremental system cloning which is the subject of this thread.
  2. Incremental home snapshots which I’ve mentioned during the above discussion.

How are my those two needs covered?

  1. Once a week I click a button executing those commands outlined in this thread: cron (in Void and systemd.service in Arch) asks me if I want to click that button. That’s it, I have fully working clones of both Void and Arch on my external USB partitions, and in fact a couple of times I’ve used them and then re-rsynced back.

  2. Incremental home snapshots method is even more, fully automated; it’s been running on its own twice daily and I have many times used one of those back ups. This too is incremental, meaning not the whole thing is copied every time but just the changes. But instead of the whole system just the home is backed up, though there’s another and crucial difference: I’ve got snapshots of my home going back to 3 months the last one being the exact replica of my current home naturally.

I’d be only happy if anyone shows (step by step, like me) a better and/or easier solution for those needs which are presumably shared by many other users. But for more complicated systems and needs there certainly must be other solutions.

(Greg Fitzgerald) #33