Have asked for an opinion.
I tested the new rsync exclusions file using
--dry-run. The bug I’ve fund is minor. There may be enough space on the target for the Safepoint but the dry-run will state there is not and prevent a Safepoint back-up from running.
Now, my exclusion of entire directory trees make the gap a lot wider. For example, the most resent Safepoint back-up excluded about 61Gb of data but the dry-run would have included that figure.
What I see is lazy programming and by profession I am a program and also quality control. It is a but of a worry where if there is laziness displayed there, where else has laziness been employed?
I recently seen the symptoms of another issue where files that the Apache2 uses were created in the root of the OS’s file system (all 0 bytes in length) and a file named /2 which is a STDOUT redirection that’s gone wrong. A scripting error in some other script.
W.D. needs a bit more quality enforced on it’s quality control.
Anyway, I now have Safepoint working exactly the way I want it to work. I just don’t need every single file backing-up. Just the stuff that matters. Why do I need to backup data that is already stored securely on other off-line drives, CDs and DVDs? (Existing on my MBL for the sheer sake of convenience.)