Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #188620 > unrolled thread

Rsync

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Rsync Fred Ringwald <fred@ringwald.org> - 2017-11-05 18:40 +0100
    Re: Rsync Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2017-11-05 19:10 +0100
      Re: Rsync deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-11-05 20:00 +0100
        Re: Rsync Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2017-11-05 20:30 +0100
          Re: Rsync Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-11-05 21:00 +0100
            Re: Rsync Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-11-05 21:20 +0100
              Re: Rsync Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2017-11-05 21:20 +0100
                Re: Rsync Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-11-05 21:50 +0100
                  Re: Rsync Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2017-11-05 22:10 +0100
                    Re: Rsync Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-11-05 22:20 +0100
                      Re: Rsync deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-11-05 23:00 +0100
                        Re: Rsync Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2017-11-06 00:30 +0100
                    Re: Rsync Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2017-11-06 15:40 +0100
                Re: Rsync David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-11-06 02:20 +0100
                  Re: Rsync The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2017-11-06 02:30 +0100
                    Re: Rsync Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2017-11-06 02:40 +0100
                  Re: Rsync Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2017-11-06 03:00 +0100
                    Re: MC (was: Rsync) Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2017-11-06 03:30 +0100
                      Re: MC (was: Rsync) David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-11-06 20:30 +0100
                  Re: Rsync Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-11-06 10:10 +0100
                    Re: Rsync David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-11-06 20:40 +0100
            Re: Rsync Joel Roth <joelz@pobox.com> - 2017-11-06 07:30 +0100
        Re: Rsync Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-11-06 04:00 +0100
    Re: Rsync Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2017-11-05 19:10 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#188620 — Rsync

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Yesterday Sven Hartge responded to my query regarding rsync, quoted below.

However, my question was not a technical question asking why rsync was not
automatically installed during a stock amd64 debian installation, but a
more philosophical question as to why the debian administrators chose to
make rsync optional, given the importance of backup data.

Thank you to Sven and to those who have read and considered my question.

Fred Ringwald
fred@ringwald.org

Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2017 22:20:52 +0100
From: Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de>
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: rsync
Message-ID: <0dunvs3187v4v8@mids.svenhartge.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Fred Ringwald <fred@ringwald.org> wrote:

> I find it fascinating that the stock amd64 netinst 9.1.0 installation
> did not install rsync. Does anyone know why that was not automatically
> included? Yes, this was easily remedied, I just find it fascinating
> that it was no longer included.

rsync is "Priority: optional", meaning it is not automatically installed
unless a package depends on or recommends it.

Grüße,
S°

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#188622

On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 12:20:31PM -0500, Fred Ringwald wrote:
>    Yesterday Sven Hartge responded to my query regarding rsync, quoted below.
>    However, my question was not a technical question asking why rsync was not
>    automatically installed during a stock amd64 debian installation, but a
>    more philosophical question as to why the debian administrators chose to
>    make rsync optional, given the importance of backup data.
>    Thank you to Sven and to those who have read and considered my question.
>    Fred Ringwald

Hi Fred,

First, please don't top-post.  It is considered discorteous on many
mailing lists, including debian-user.

The philsophy there is that it doesn't really meet the criteria for
required, important, or standard [0].

There is perhaps an argument, based in part on how you were surprised by
its absence, that rsync should be considered important.  However, I have
personally never been surprised when it has been absent, as I do not
consider it a core utility.  It is certainly very useful and I install
it on all of my systems, but I can see how someone going for a minimal
system would consider it bloat.

Regards,

-Roberto

[0] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/#priorities
-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188625

Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:

> I can see how someone going for a minimal
> system would consider it bloat.

+1

used 2 times rsync in past 10y private and professional daily use of linux
(desktop and server)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188626

On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 07:50:56PM +0100, deloptes wrote:
> Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> 
> > I can see how someone going for a minimal
> > system would consider it bloat.
> 
> +1
> 
> used 2 times rsync in past 10y private and professional daily use of linux
> (desktop and server)
> 
Whereas I have rsnapshot deployed at multiple sites backing up dozens of
machines.  I also use it to manually sync file between my network home
directory and my laptop with a home-spun script that started of as
probably the very first script I wrote of any meaningful size or
complexity.  (That was before there were good, or maybe any, solutions
for automatically syncing files across multiple devices).

Of course, it is really easy to add packages to a system that has
adequate space, where installing an over-bloated base/standard system to
a low resource machine is more complex.  Despite the enormous utility I
find in it, leaving rsync out of the base system is the right thing.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188628

On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 14:26:38 -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:

> Of course, it is really easy to add packages to a system that has
> adequate space, where installing an over-bloated base/standard system to
> a low resource machine is more complex.  Despite the enormous utility I
> find in it, leaving rsync out of the base system is the right thing.

I would take "base system" to mean what the installer means by it. In
which case, it is should not be associated with "standard system
utililites". They are different sets of packages.

Having said that: a system without rsync does not lack the ability to
do backups, even though it might be a more convenient utility to use.
Midnight Commander and locate are also very useful additions, but that
does merit including them in Priority: standard.

Also, Priority: standard inclusion varies over time. netcat, for
example (amongst other programs) was demoted to optional in jessie or
stretch (I forget which).

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188629

On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 19:51:48 +0000, Brian wrote:

> Midnight Commander and locate are also very useful additions, but that
> does merit including them in Priority: standard.
      ^
      not

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188630

On 2017-11-06 06:12, Brian wrote:
> On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 19:51:48 +0000, Brian wrote:
> 
>> Midnight Commander and locate are also very useful additions, but that
>> does merit including them in Priority: standard.
>       ^
>       not

Not so sure about locate, but I'd include MC, with internal edit, some
time before I'd include, say, Nano.

-- 
"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its 
government."
 -- Thomas Paine

Registered Linux User: 554515

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188631

On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 12:18:50 -0800, Weaver wrote:

> On 2017-11-06 06:12, Brian wrote:
> > On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 19:51:48 +0000, Brian wrote:
> > 
> >> Midnight Commander and locate are also very useful additions, but that
> >> does merit including them in Priority: standard.
> >       ^
> >       not
> 
> Not so sure about locate, but I'd include MC, with internal edit, some
> time before I'd include, say, Nano.

Nano is an editor. So is vim-tiny. Both are in the base system. Why two
editors? I suppose they cater for different audiences. Or tastes. (And
history plays a part). Don't fight it.

mc? Forget about it. Just make it one of the first things you install.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188632

On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 08:47:48PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> 
> Nano is an editor. So is vim-tiny. Both are in the base system. Why two
> editors? I suppose they cater for different audiences. Or tastes. (And
> history plays a part). Don't fight it.
> 
As far as vim-tiny, vi is specified/required [0] in POSIX.1-2008.  On
the other hand, nano is probably easier to manage for a user who is not
already familiar with vi.  I can certainly see why both are included.

Regards,

-Roberto

[0] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/vi.html

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188633

On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 16:00:45 -0500
Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 08:47:48PM +0000, Brian wrote:
> > 
> > Nano is an editor. So is vim-tiny. Both are in the base system. Why
> > two editors? I suppose they cater for different audiences. Or
> > tastes. (And history plays a part). Don't fight it.
> >   
> As far as vim-tiny, vi is specified/required [0] in POSIX.1-2008.  On
> the other hand, nano is probably easier to manage for a user who is
> not already familiar with vi. 

Years ago, I kept a copy of Unix For Dummies on my bookshelf, for the
specific purpose of looking up how to use vi when I had to fix a lilo
problem using a tomsrtbt floppy...

Ahhhh, editor wars...

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188636

Joe wrote:

> Ahhhh, editor wars...

yes indeed. My favorite is ne, but vi was wide spread for historic reasons
on all kinds of *nixes.
I once had to compile vim for Solaris as the vi version was so crippled.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188638

On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 22:57:10 +0100, deloptes wrote:

> Joe wrote:
> 
> > Ahhhh, editor wars...
> 
> yes indeed. My favorite is ne, but vi was wide spread for historic reasons
> on all kinds of *nixes.
> I once had to compile vim for Solaris as the vi version was so crippled.

No editor warfare from me. Just a desire to discuss how packages get to
be in the standard task. An editor example was given but note: nano is
Priority: important. vim-tiny (which replaced nvi) is also Priority:
important.

Not the best examples to mention in the context of the topic. :)

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188650

On Sun, Nov 05, 2017 at 04:00:45PM -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> As far as vim-tiny, vi is specified/required [0] in POSIX.1-2008.

So is ed(1), but Debian has elected not to include ed in Standard.

Some of the Debian choices are simply that -- choices.  The developers
weigh the results of popularity-contest vs. the various standards
vs. the historical practices vs. what other distributions do, and
come up with something that makes sense for most of the users, most
of the time.

I install vim and rsync because I use them.  I have no problem with
needing to do this, and it makes sense not to include them in Standard
because not everyone is going to use them.  Likewise, I don't use emacs,
so I don't install it.  I'd be mildly irritated if emacs were included
in Standard, so I can see why someone who doesn't use rsync would feel
that way about rsync.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188640

On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 12:18:50 (-0800), Weaver wrote:
> On 2017-11-06 06:12, Brian wrote:
> > On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 19:51:48 +0000, Brian wrote:
> > 
> >> Midnight Commander and locate are also very useful additions, but that
> >> does merit including them in Priority: standard.
> >       ^
> >       not
> 
> Not so sure about locate, but I'd include MC, with internal edit, some
> time before I'd include, say, Nano.

IMO you have to have an editor suitable for root to configure the
system. Vi is fine for those who know it, but it has to be learnt.
Almost anyone who can read can use nano with no knowledge whatsoever.

As for MC, it's in the population of programs that I would never run
as root, along with X, Emacs, …Office, browsers, media players (does
that cover it?). Root does not need Swiss Army knives slashing about.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188641

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2017-11-05 at 20:16, David Wright wrote:

> As for MC, it's in the population of programs that I would never run 
> as root, along with X, Emacs, …Office, browsers, media players (does 
> that cover it?). Root does not need Swiss Army knives slashing
> about.

That last sentence is .sig-worthy. I'm kind of tempted to add it to my
own master signature file (most of which never sees the light of day
these days, sadly enough).

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188642

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 06/11/17 14:22, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2017-11-05 at 20:16, David Wright wrote:
> 
>> As for MC, it's in the population of programs that I would never run 
>> as root, along with X, Emacs, …Office, browsers, media players (does 
>> that cover it?). Root does not need Swiss Army knives slashing
>> about.
> 
> That last sentence is .sig-worthy. I'm kind of tempted to add it to my
> own master signature file (most of which never sees the light of day
> these days, sadly enough).

I frequently run perl as root, though ... is a Swiss Army Chainsaw
better? :-)

Richard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188643

On 2017-11-06 11:16, David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 12:18:50 (-0800), Weaver wrote:
>> On 2017-11-06 06:12, Brian wrote:
>> > On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 19:51:48 +0000, Brian wrote:
>> >
>> >> Midnight Commander and locate are also very useful additions, but that
>> >> does merit including them in Priority: standard.
>> >       ^
>> >       not
>>
>> Not so sure about locate, but I'd include MC, with internal edit, some
>> time before I'd include, say, Nano.
> 
> IMO you have to have an editor suitable for root to configure the
> system. Vi is fine for those who know it, but it has to be learnt.
> Almost anyone who can read can use nano with no knowledge whatsoever.
> 
> As for MC, it's in the population of programs that I would never run
> as root, along with X, Emacs, …Office, browsers, media players (does
> that cover it?). Root does not need Swiss Army knives slashing about.

Well, I don't know if I'd describe MC as `a Swiss Army Knife'. Thunar
and nautilus, maybe.
I also find aptitude handy at that level (before I've installed a DE,
because I can see what I have installed and get every package
description, installed or uninstalled, right there in the NCurses
interface. Wordgrinder's another I'd fit in that category, for those who
don't want a GUI and LibreOffice Writer.

I certainly wouldn't fit MC into the category of a multi-Megabyte
browser or media programme requiring a heavy GUI interface.
With all due respect, that's a bit over the top.

-- 
"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its 
government."
 -- Thomas Paine

Registered Linux User: 554515

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188644 — Re: MC (was: Rsync)

Weaver composed on 2017-11-05 17:55 (UTC-0800):

> David Wright wrote:

>> On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 12:18:50 (-0800), Weaver wrote:

>>> Brian wrote:

>>> > On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 19:51:48 +0000, Brian wrote:

>>> >> Midnight Commander and locate are also very useful additions, but that
>>> >> does merit including them in Priority: standard.
>>> >       ^
>>> >       not

>>> Not so sure about locate, but I'd include MC, with internal edit, some
>>> time before I'd include, say, Nano.

>> IMO you have to have an editor suitable for root to configure the
>> system. Vi is fine for those who know it, but it has to be learnt.
>> Almost anyone who can read can use nano with no knowledge whatsoever.

>> As for MC, it's in the population of programs that I would never run
>> as root, along with X, Emacs, …Office, browsers, media players (does
>> that cover it?). Root does not need Swiss Army knives slashing about.

> Well, I don't know if I'd describe MC as `a Swiss Army Knife'. Thunar
> and nautilus, maybe.
> I also find aptitude handy at that level (before I've installed a DE,
> because I can see what I have installed and get every package
> description, installed or uninstalled, right there in the NCurses
> interface. Wordgrinder's another I'd fit in that category, for those who
> don't want a GUI and LibreOffice Writer.

> I certainly wouldn't fit MC into the category of a multi-Megabyte
> browser or media programme requiring a heavy GUI interface.
> With all due respect, that's a bit over the top. 

Not having MC is a handicap I won't long tolerate. In any unfamiliar
environment, it's the first thing I look for. On a fresh Debian minimal
installation I make, apt install mc is usually the first or second entry to go
into root's .bash_history.
-- 
"Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Whatever else you
get, get wisdom." Proverbs 4:7 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188653 — Re: MC (was: Rsync)

On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 21:21:01 (-0500), Felix Miata wrote:
> Weaver composed on 2017-11-05 17:55 (UTC-0800):
> 
> > David Wright wrote:
> 
> >> On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 12:18:50 (-0800), Weaver wrote:
> 
> >>> Brian wrote:
> 
> >>> > On Sun 05 Nov 2017 at 19:51:48 +0000, Brian wrote:
> 
> >>> >> Midnight Commander and locate are also very useful additions, but that
> >>> >> does merit including them in Priority: standard.
> >>> >       ^
> >>> >       not
> 
> >>> Not so sure about locate, but I'd include MC, with internal edit, some
> >>> time before I'd include, say, Nano.
> 
> >> IMO you have to have an editor suitable for root to configure the
> >> system. Vi is fine for those who know it, but it has to be learnt.
> >> Almost anyone who can read can use nano with no knowledge whatsoever.
> 
> >> As for MC, it's in the population of programs that I would never run
> >> as root, along with X, Emacs, …Office, browsers, media players (does
> >> that cover it?). Root does not need Swiss Army knives slashing about.
> 
> > Well, I don't know if I'd describe MC as `a Swiss Army Knife'. Thunar
> > and nautilus, maybe.
> > I also find aptitude handy at that level (before I've installed a DE,
> > because I can see what I have installed and get every package
> > description, installed or uninstalled, right there in the NCurses
> > interface. Wordgrinder's another I'd fit in that category, for those who
> > don't want a GUI and LibreOffice Writer.
> 
> > I certainly wouldn't fit MC into the category of a multi-Megabyte
> > browser or media programme requiring a heavy GUI interface.
> > With all due respect, that's a bit over the top. 

That wasn't my point: I don't care about how you categorise it.
MC is a program that can wipe half your system in two or three
keypresses. It can mix together a couple of directories likewise.
There's no easy way of recording what just happened so that you
can unpick it. It doesn't buy me enough in return. That's why
I won't use it as root.

> Not having MC is a handicap I won't long tolerate. In any unfamiliar
> environment, it's the first thing I look for. On a fresh Debian minimal
> installation I make, apt install mc is usually the first or second entry to go
> into root's .bash_history.

Ditto, but that's for me, as a user. Of course I want a file manager.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#188647

On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 19:16:30 -0600
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:


> 
> As for MC, it's in the population of programs that I would never run
> as root, along with X, Emacs, …Office, browsers, media players (does
> that cover it?). Root does not need Swiss Army knives slashing about.

Isn't that odd? I almost never run mc as anything other than root. I
normally use Nautilus or Thunar for file work, but if it's anything
a bit hairy, I fire up a sudo mc terminal.

It's Zen, or something, I see the old Norton Commander window and it
takes me back to the days when hard drives were measured in tens of
megabytes, and the computer cost as much as a car. 'For God's sake, be
careful, lad, this thing is live!'

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web