ggirao Posted May 6, 2013 Report Share Posted May 6, 2013 Open thread in 8, happens the same to me. Today in my diary backup is tries to do full 2,2TB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NTmatter Posted May 23, 2013 Report Share Posted May 23, 2013 Changing permissions, attributes, or timestamp of a file causes Retrospect to consider it a new file. Propagating permissions touches the permissions of all files and folders in the directory. Unfortunately, you'll need to wait for this one to complete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prl Posted May 24, 2013 Report Share Posted May 24, 2013 I've never quite understood why changing the metadata on a file (permissions, attributes etc) and not the last write time causes the whole file to be backed up, rather than just backing up the new attributes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersmurf Posted June 3, 2013 Report Share Posted June 3, 2013 I have noticed this too. Propagating permissions, when I do it, is usually done just for thoroughness, when a user reports he can't access a single file he needs and it turns out to be a permissions issue. So my workaround for Retrospect is to manually fix the individual file, spot check others in the same directory etc., instead of propagating. If permissions change, I do want Retrospect to record that change, back it up. The problem is that it backs up even cases in which nothing was changed. My guess is that at the OS level the metadata gets a new change timestamp (or whatever) when permissions are propogated regardless of whether anything was actually changed. If that's true there's not much Retrospect can do about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.