[Box Backup] Observations on Win32 client

[Nick Knight]

Hello All,

Backupctl pretty much fixed - I have converted it to using win32 named
pipes, just in testing haze now.

I am happy to start releasing the source code whenever I perform a
release of the binary, I was waiting to get it merged into the main
source but I know Ben is very busy and a couple of people have requested
it.

I have been thinking about running a separate SF project for the win32
client - mainly cos I am having difficulty tracking the bug list, unless
anyone has got any other suggestions, I could run my own web bug
tracker.

The restore file modified restore; I have never looked into, but will
add to my list of fixes!

The gui when I have time I will start, I have a windows front end for
rsync which should port over quite nicely, but I just need the time!

Next major fixes are backing up ACL's (I suppose this would fix the file
time stamps).

Adding a bandwidth throttle at the application level is always a bit of
a cludge, and doing it at the firewall is always more accurate, but I am
for some form of throttle, it should be quite simple to implement, but I
don't want to start making too many changes from Ben's source.

Regards

Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: boxbackup-admin@fluffy.co.uk [mailto:boxbackup-admin@fluffy.co.uk]
On Behalf Of Ben Summers
Sent: 15 February 2005 16:47
To: boxbackup@fluffy.co.uk
Subject: Re: [Box Backup] Observations on Win32 client


On 15 Feb 2005, at 12:34, Jamie Neil wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Firstly, thanks to Ben for developing this project - we've been=20
> looking for a decent online backup system for 12 months and Box Backup

> is the first one to really impress :)
>
> We're doing a bit of testing with a Linux (Debian) server and the=20
> Win32 client, and I've had a scan through the mailing list archives,=20
> but I still have a couple of questions/comments:
>
> 1) Is the native win32 client code going to be merged with the main=20
> branch?

Yes.

>  If so, is there any timescale for this?

As soon as I get time to do so!

>  If not, is the source available?

I'm sure Nick will be more than happy to share.

>
> 2) I understand that there is currently a problem with using=20
> bbackupctl under Win32 related to sockets. Is anyone working on a fix?

I believe so.

>
> 3) File timestamps seem to be stored correctly (at least the query=20
> tool reports them correctly), but not restored. I assume this is a=20
> bug.

Sounds like it.

>
> 4) Is anyone actively working on a Win32 GUI interface? If so I would=20
> be very interested in helping out - even if it's just testing and=20
> debugging (I'm more of a hacker than a programmer). My wishlist for=20
> such an interface would be:

A couple of people have mentioned that they're starting such projects=20
on the list. I intend for the Box Backup project to remain as a core=20
engine with no GUI, but work with others to put a nice front end on it=20
(as separate projects).


> 5) The ability to backup and restore ACLs and DOS flags would be nice,

> but I gather from reading around that this is a much more complex=20
> problem that it appears.

I don't think it's too bad, it's just it's a bit fiddly. Locked files=20
are more of an issue.

>
> 6) From our testing, boxbackup seems to be able to saturate even fat=20
> pipes, which can cause problems when backups are done during the day.=20
> Some kind of scheduled bandwidth throttling would be invaluable (I=20
> know this could probably be done with another program in true *nix=20
> tradition, but in Windows environments this is not so simple).

It's on my list. However, I suggest dealing with it using pf style=20
tools or on the firewall/router for now.

Ben



_______________________________________________
boxbackup mailing list
boxbackup@fluffy.co.uk
http://lists.warhead.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/boxbackup