Am Freitag, 6. November 2009 21:51:08 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net:
> > As far as I know they didn't have atomic commits back then - am I
> > right in that?
What I mean is if they tried to version single files (like cvs) or just the
filesystem state (like Mercurial / Git / ...).
> > How exac
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 10:46:48AM +0100, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 1. November 2009 13:52:47 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net:
> > The original idea for versioning filesystems was to automatically
> > keep track of individual changes, and it failed magnificently.
>
> As far
Hello,
On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 01:52:47PM +0100, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 06:51:43PM +0200, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
>
> > I do backups of sensitive information, but the reason I want a
> > snapshotting filesystem for is automated decision when to do the
> > backup.
>
Am Sonntag, 1. November 2009 13:52:47 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net:
> The original idea for versioning filesystems was to automatically keep
> track of individual changes, and it failed magnificently.
As far as I know they didn't have atomic commits back then - am I right in
that?
> This is
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 06:51:43PM +0200, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> I do backups of sensitive information, but the reason I want a
> snapshotting filesystem for is automated decision when to do the
> backup.
There is no automated decision, that was my whole point!
The original idea for version
Am Montag, 26. Oktober 2009 07:22:28 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net:
> I have some vague ideas how such partial subhurds could be used; but not
> really much of an idea how such a setup would look like exactly...
> Probably needs some very concrete use case(s) to work from.
Can you think of some?
Hello,
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 07:22:28AM +0100, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 03:38:08PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
>
> > I'd like to have a snapshotting filesystem at my box, because having
> > experienced the possibility to roll anything back in git, I'd be happy
>
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 03:38:08PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 01:58:52AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:46:23AM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:59:49AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net
> > > wrote:
>
Hello,
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 01:58:52AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:46:23AM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:59:49AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net
> > wrote:
>
> > > It's much more interesting to have a partially customized
> > >
Am Dienstag, 22. September 2009 01:58:52 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net:
> The snapshotting filesystems we are seeing now OTOH avoid all this, by
> not trying to track individual changes, but rather only creating
> snaphots of the current state on explicit request. (With manual
> triggering, or ti
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:46:23AM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:59:49AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net
> wrote:
> > It's much more interesting to have a partially customized
> > environment *without* booting a complete extra system instance; but
> > rather accessin
Hello,
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:59:49AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 11:14:32AM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
>
> > And it would be nice to be able to just use the same base Hurd for the
> > main hurd and all subhurds - it needs a readonly mounted partit
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 11:14:32AM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Montag, 3. August 2009 07:25:38 schrieb Sergiu Ivanov:
> > My understanding is that a sub-Hurd is something like another
> > instance of Hurd running on top of the same instance of gnumach.
Right.
> > It seems that
13 matches
Mail list logo
