[OT] Understanding Linux backup limitations

[Brian McKee]

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Young <tuxman at knology.net> wrote:
> Creating an image backup of a Linux install is a pain. And because of
> that it doesn't get done as often as it should. Or people backup only
> their home directory. I know, for myself, that it's stopped me from
> trying out certain things because the risk/reward/pain/time ratios just
> weren't good enough. It's slowing down the learning process for me, and
> I'll never really move to Linux unless this gets fixed, because I know
> I'll end up skipping a backup.

mondo (www.mondorescue.org) will do a bootable image backup on a running system.
(side note - read the FAQ re Ubuntu if you try it out)
It can be added to a cron job, so you'll never forget it.

<A backup that isn't run automatically is a backup that won't be run
when you really needed it -some guy named Murphy>

If you change something while it's running, your backup might be
inconsistent, if that really bugs you, use LVM snapshots, or swap to
runlevel 1 to make sure nobody but you the operator is doing anything.

> And, while image backups aren't the only type of backup needed, the rest
> of the backup programs available aren't very friendly either.

There are 'hundreds' of linux backup programs.  There has to be one
you like.  Granted many of them are not 'simple' because linux users
are usually very demanding about their backups and want lots of knobs
to twiddle so to speak.   If that's not you, there are lots of other
choices.

I've heard of sbackup, backupPC, amanda, bacula but not used any of
them.  This would be a good point for some others on the list to jump
in with their recommendations :-)  At my day job I use rsnapshot and
mondo.  At home my linux boxes tend to be pretty fluid - I often make
tarballs of my home directory and call that good enough.  I doubt what
I like is what you like, and backup programs really do tend to be in
the eye of the beholder.

What programs have you tried?

Brian