Time Machine-style backups with rsync (2018)

Post by wrs » Mon, Feb 02, 2026, 2:14 AM UTC

nine_k wrote: post #4

If we spoke about a Linux box, one that prudently ran ZFS, or XFS on top of LVM, it would be possible to make a snapshot before the diffing and sending, so that the snapshot would be indeed point-in-time. IDK if whatever macOS uses for the filesystem supports snapshots. Otherwise, I think, restic or kopia are better for proper backups, and Syncthing for keeping a mirror copy. But the simplicity of this script in char…

Post by c0nsumer » Mon, Feb 02, 2026, 2:53 AM UTC

EGreg wrote: post #8

Why make hard links when you can use rsync or syncthing to just make an actual copy on an external hard drive eg via wifi or just remotely?

Post by human_llm » Mon, Feb 02, 2026, 4:12 AM UTC

c0nsumer wrote: post #12

Ha. That's a throwback. I did the same thing, but with a more detailed writeup, in 2009: https://nuxx.net/blog/2009/12/06/time-machine-for-freebsd/ It was really handy, but I now use borg as it just works better.

Post by LeoPanthera » Mon, Feb 02, 2026, 5:28 AM UTC

Post by NSUserDefaults » Mon, Feb 02, 2026, 6:22 AM UTC

locknitpicker wrote: post #18

LeoPanthera wrote: post #17

"borg" has basically solved backups permanently. It's deduplicated, even across snapshots, compressed, and end-to-end encrypted. I'm surprised it's not more well known.

> "borg" has basically solved backups permanently. It's deduplicated, even across snapshots, compressed, and end-to-end encrypted. Deduplication helps minimize space, but isn't it a major liability in backups? I mean, what happens when you try to restore your backups but a lone sector holding a file from way back in the past happens to not be recoverable? Doesn't it mean that no matter how frequent your backups are,…