[Unison-hackers] Sneaker Net or Incremental Backup

[Duane McKinney]

What about a flag that tells it to instead of executing the copies, just 
prints out a list of the files that would be copied?  A proper name is 
escaping me at the moment, but it is a common option on programs.

Benjamin Pierce wrote:
> Both of these features would be easy to implement using information  
> that Unison already has available.  If you want to give it a try, I  
> can tell you where to start.  (I'd be reluctant, though, to add this  
> code to the main sources -- Unison arguably has too many flags and  
> switches already!)
> 
> Best,
> 
>      - Benjamin
> 
> On Dec 27, 2008, at 10:27 AM, Duane McKinney wrote:
> 
>> I searched, but came up empty.  Can this be done.
>> I sync two offices using unison.
>> 1) (Optional)I would like to be able to set a preference that says,  
>> don't try to
>> sync a file if it would require X bytes transferred
>> 2) Get a list of changed files from a root.  That way I can copy the  
>> files to a
>> removable drive and sync them when I get to the other office.
>>
>> Here is my reasoning.  Most of the time, root changes are very  
>> small, a few MB.
>> But Let's say that I download a new CENTOS release and place it on  
>> the file
>> server.  This may be a poor example, because I could retrieve it  
>> over the
>> internet again, but just bear with me.  I would like for unison, to  
>> instead of
>> trying to sync this file over the network to skip it.  The I would  
>> like to be
>> able to say once a week, run a job, that would take the differences  
>> in the root
>> and sent them to a USB drive.  I can then carry this drive to  
>> location 2, and
>> update the root there.   Then from my understanding, the network  
>> sync would
>> detect that both roots are identical.
>>
>> That way, our bandwidth isn't being eaten up for hours/days, trying  
>> to perform a
>> sync that will most likely fail because it will take so long.
>>
>> Also, this would be more useful, than synchronizing the whole root  
>> to a usb
>> drive, because, the total of the data that I am synchronizing is >  
>> 1TB.  I would
>> not mind moving a few GB (<100) via USB.  I am trying to avoid  
>> needing either, a
>> lot of time, or a bunch of USB drives (one for each root).
>>
>> I have not yet looked at the source, but I would assume that most of  
>> the items
>> required for this feature are already in place.  Is it feasible?  Is  
>> there
>> already a way?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unison-hackers mailing list
>> Unison-hackers at lists.seas.upenn.edu
>> http://lists.seas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/unison-hackers