| Poll |
| WHAT ARE YOU, and WHAT DO YOU USE? |
| programmer, Kompare or Krusader |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| programmer, Unison |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
| programmer, some-other-thing |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
| programmer, I use only VERSION CONTROL |
|
21% |
[ 3 ] |
| NON-programmer, Kompare or Krusader |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
| NON-programmer, Unison |
|
14% |
[ 2 ] |
| NON-programmer, some-other-thing |
|
7% |
[ 1 ] |
| NON-programmer, I use only VERSION CONTROL |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| I DO NOT SYNC DIRECTORIES HA HA HA |
|
35% |
[ 5 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 14 |
|
| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: POLL ON DIRECTORY (FOLDER) SYNCHRONIZATION (not versioning!)
 Posted: Oct 03, 2008 - 10:30 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 05, 2006
Posts: 39
Location: Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are insects.
Status: Offline
|
|
I am a bit disappointed. I scoure all sorts Linux fora for wisdom on FILE AND DIRECTORY SYNCHRONIZATIONS, only to find lots of unanswered posts or replies that have little to do with the questions.
I define humble sychronization as
- keeping two identical nested directories on different media or different machines, both of whom can be worked on (one at a time... single user!)
- recognition the latest files, based on a combination of size, timestamp, etc. but without getting into deeper detail, flagging them for overwriting onto the older versions of themselves or for copy-and-rename
- a decent GUI for reviewing files flagged for copying & overwriting (yes, I NEVER overwrite ANY file without staring it in its beady eyes, and yes, I do keep separate if not 100% updated backups)
- easy sync by overwriting older versions
- ease of deleting single or duplicate files
- a binary comparison, and perhaps a text diff facility, although they won't be used much (I'm loth to binary-compare or diff .5 to 5GB of mostly binary or non-text crud every single effing time just because timestamps are touch-based instead of change-based!)
- NOT A VERSION CONTROL NOR AN INCREMENTAL BACKUP SYSTEM with an obscure trail of chained files, virtualization layers, hashes, databases, etc etc. (although I do understand that lots of people do not even consider synching without the safety of automated versioning!)
In the stinky Win$$$ world there's A TRAINFUL of apps that fit the bill.
On *nix, I hear that Kompare, Unison, and Krusader do, 'cept IMHO they really don't - what with near useless timestamp policies, missing options (like Krusader's famous one-side-only-and-only-for-single-files file delete), undeclared filesize comparison preferences (bytes vs. sectors) etc etc etc.
Now the question: I want to figure out once and for all if
- it's just programmers that use versioning for dir sync, or if some advanced non-programmer users do too
- or, if Linux users don't really synch, although I can't imagine how on earth one could do without! 
If you intend to try to convince me that there's no alternative to diff or byte level comparison, don't waste your time. You are just wrong, and probably a smarter than me text-crunching versioning-dependent programmer too! 
Please forgive the plethora of possible replies - I see no way of doing a 2-dimensional poll.
ARE YOU A PROGRAMMER OR NOT?
and
WHAT DO YOU USE
FOR SYNCHRONIZING DIRECTORIES
SO E.G. YOU CAN USE UP-TO-DATE FILES
ON DIFFERENT COMPUTERS? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: POLL ON DIRECTORY (FOLDER) SYNCHRONIZATION (not versioni
Posted: Oct 03, 2008 - 10:42 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 05, 2006
Posts: 39
Location: Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are insects.
Status: Offline
|
|
PS - worth a separate message !
ALL my machines, Win & Lin,
have ALL CLOCKS on UTC,
obsessively synched via NTP.
I can swear by my timestamps,
provided they reflect last change date,
not last touch- or copy-over-date.  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 03, 2008 - 12:37 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 06, 2006
Posts: 136
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Oct 03, 2008 - 03:37 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 05, 2006
Posts: 39
Location: Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are insects.
Status: Offline
|
|
Hello Taffy! Thanks for the headup...
I've been on Amazon S3 a while already,
and already went nuts over versions rabbiting out of control,
cache + asynchronous writes, network delays etc.
So off I went to Dropbox.
The closed source APPLICATION downloads at .6 Mbps.
Why should it be any slower than a file transfer?
My LAN is old, it just does 100Mbps.
So it's a 166 times drop in speed.
In return for the speed drop, my files are subject to DMCA.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
