Reasons you might want to avoid bup
-----------------------------------
- - This is a very early version. Therefore it will most probably not work
- for you, but we don't know why. It is also missing some
- probably-critical features.
+ - It's not remotely as well tested as something like tar, so it's
+ more likely to eat your data. It's also missing some
+ probably-critical features, though fewer than it used to be.
- It requires python >= 2.6, a C compiler, and an installed git
version >= 1.5.6. It also requires par2 if you want fsck to be
Notable changes introduced by a release
=======================================
+ - <a href="note/0.29.2-from-0.29.1.md">Changes in 0.29.2 as compared to 0.29.1</a>
- <a href="note/0.29.1-from-0.29.md">Changes in 0.29.1 as compared to 0.29</a>
- <a href="note/0.29-from-0.28.1.md">Changes in 0.29 as compared to 0.28.1</a>
- <a href="note/0.28.1-from-0.28.md">Changes in 0.28.1 as compared to 0.28</a>
- Run the tests:
- make test
+ make long-check
+
+ or if you're in a bit more of a hurry:
+
+ make check
The tests should pass. If they don't pass for you, stop here and
send an email to bup-list@googlegroups.com. Though if there are
bup help restore
...
- - Initialize the default BUP_DIR (~/.bup):
+ - Initialize the default BUP_DIR (~/.bup -- you can choose another by
+ either specifying `bup -d DIR ...` or setting the `BUP_DIR`
+ environment variable for a command):
bup init
- Look at how little extra space your second backup used on top of
the first:
- du -s ~/.bup
+ du -s ~/.bup
- Restore the first tar backup again (the ~1 is git notation for "one
older than the most recent"):
- bup needs better documentation.
- According to a recent article about bup in Linux Weekly News
+ According to an article about bup in Linux Weekly News
(https://lwn.net/Articles/380983/), "it's a bit short on examples and
a user guide would be nice." Documentation is the sort of thing that
will never be great unless someone from outside contributes it (since