Path: csiph.com!news.samoylyk.net!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: c.buhtz@posteo.jp Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: [src:backintime] Upload despite Hard Freeze (no response from maintainer/uploader) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 09:00:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Tue Jun 17 06:54:10 2025 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.496 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -5.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23063 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/ffcfc187fc98dfc065fef998dcc8bb39@posteo.de Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 24 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2025 06:53:51 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-References: <4bKKVr01S2z6tyB@submission01.posteo.de> <28a5371a-e051-4175-a82a-3c7994fb9544@t-online.de> <70c8d0ec7c2f192b83ae1932d83518c5@posteo.de> <2406259.IPqQCg1nHW@soren-desktop> <87cyb31hol.fsf@navis.mail-host-address-is-not-set> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:16932 Hello Nicholas, Thank you for your interesting feedback. Am 16.06.2025 23:48 schrieb Nicholas D Steeves: > if backintime's upstream will officially > support Debian's btrfs layout ("@rootfs" rather than "@"). I don't know enough about "btrfs" to understand that. Feel free to explain this in an upstream Issue [1] or at our mailing list [2]. We are always open for discussion. Keep in mind that backintime does use rsync in the back. > also encourage upstream to support Fedora's flat layout ("root" and > "home" if I remember correctly, maybe "rootfs"). It's still just a > two-subvolume flat layout. I also don't understand that. Is this also related to the btrfs topic? Thank you for your feedback. Regards, Christian Buhtz [1] -- [2] --