Tar: A slop-free alternative to rsync

The repo it links to presents their reasons for tracking and potentially avoiding LLM-supported projects; are all of those ridiculous? Is the technology's track record so amazing as to make the conclusion ridiculous? Or did you mean tar as a replacement to rsync, specifically?

[0] https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware

Re: Tar: A slop-free alternative to rsync

#7

Post by opan » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 5:40 PM UTC

t312227 wrote: post #3

hello, as always: imho (!) tar is great, and well kown - but not particularly for "incremental backups over the net" ... this is what rsync is/was for. idk ... whatever the problem is with rsync, but apparently thats none of my business ;)) you could use, and which usage is very similar to rsync: rclone * https://rclone.org/ intro * https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2025/4x-faster-network-fil... and additionally its…

>I had somehow pigeonholed it as "for cloud to local or vice-versa", and never considered it for local transfer, like over my own LAN.

Huh. Exact same thoughts here. I never used rclone because I don't use AWS or similar, just lots of bare metal on and off my LAN that I can ssh to. I am quite comfortable with rsync's quirks and args, so not sure I'll quit using it, but maybe I'll try rclone next time I do a massive transfer. Similarly I've been shown that ddrescue can act as a full dd replacement, but I'm so used to dd I still tend to use it.

Re: Tar: A slop-free alternative to rsync

#8

Post by rurban » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 6:27 PM UTC

Drew is getting unbearable.

Re: Tar: A slop-free alternative to rsync

#9

Post by oompydoompy74 » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 8:20 PM UTC

replooda wrote: post #6

oompydoompy74 wrote: post #5

What a ridiculous position to take.

The repo it links to presents their reasons for tracking and potentially avoiding LLM-supported projects; are all of those ridiculous? Is the technology's track record so amazing as to make the conclusion ridiculous? Or did you mean tar as a replacement to rsync, specifically? [0] https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware

Yes and Yes and Yes. I’m not an AI maximalist, but this is an extreme position that I believe is, in fact, ridiculous.

Re: Tar: A slop-free alternative to rsync

#10

Post by replooda » Sat, Mar 28, 2026, 8:38 PM UTC

oompydoompy74 wrote: post #9

replooda wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The repo it links to presents their reasons for tracking and potentially avoiding LLM-supported projects; are all of those ridiculous? Is the technology's track record so amazing as to make the conclusion ridiculous? Or did you mean tar as a replacement to rsync, specifically? [0] https://codeberg.org/small-hack/open-slopware

Yes and Yes and Yes. I’m not an AI maximalist, but this is an extreme position that I believe is, in fact, ridiculous.

You find it ridiculous, you find it ridiculous. But saying it's "extreme" to avoid software and seek alternatives is just absurd.