[Klug-general] KLUG Project

[Andrew Miller (Spode)]

I think this could probably be achieved with bash scripts.

If I could make a slight suggestion..

Half the problem I find with open source, is there are 100 projects all 
trying to do the same thing. Why not just find a backup program that is 
*close* to what you want and adapt it specifically to your needs? Either 
by forking the code, or by adding the base.

Spode

Wayne wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 09:02:39 +0000
> Karl Lattimer <karl at qdh.org.uk> wrote:
>
>   
>> On Sat, 2008-03-15 at 08:43 +0000, Dan Attwood wrote:
>>     
>>> I've got an other idea for a small project - hopefully simple
>>> project.
>>>
>>> A music backup program. You point it at your store of ogg files and
>>> press go. And you then just keep feeding it cd/dvds when it asks for
>>> them. However unlike nearly every other back program i've looked
>>> this one won't zip or compress the files in any way. It just fits
>>> as much as it can onto dvd as native files and then moves onto the
>>> next dvd. Thus should you need to recover you whitesnake collection
>>> you can just grab dvd 6 and copy the files back off without needing
>>> dvds 1 - 5 as well.
>>>       
>> One thing I'd like to mention if you were going to do this.
>>
>> High parity archives! splitting rars/tars/zips is all well and good,
>> however you need to make sure if one CD breaks a bit, all of the music
>> isn't suddenly trash.
>>
>> If you can get over that small problem, then I'd use it! I've been
>> looking for a decent backup program for archiving media, wizbit will
>> be cool for concurrent backup, which is a distributed git
>> filesystem... but its a while off and not suitable for media.
>>
>> K,
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Kent mailing list
>> Kent at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/kent
>>     
>
>
> The idea of a non-compressing music backup is a good one, was you
> thinking making incremental backups the idea, just point it at your base
> directory for music and it works out whats been added then burns the
> additional to disk or more just a complete backup each time or both?
> I would think incremental would be the most useful saving lots of time
> on large collections!!!
> You could have an option on whether to split albums over disks or not.
>
> Wayne.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Kent mailing list
> Kent at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/kent
>
>