From: Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#26030: [PATCH] gnu: Add rsnapshot.
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 15:23:46 -0500

> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 08:08:56PM +0100, Thomas Danckaert wrote:
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add rsnapshot.
>>
>> * gnu/packages/backup.scm (rsnapshot): New variable.
>
> Cool, the venerable rsnapshot!

glad you agree :-)

> We should use the tarball from
> <https://github.com/rsnapshot/rsnapshot/releases/download/1.4.2/rsnapshot-1.4.2.tar.gz>
> instead, which is already bootstrapped. Then, we can leave out these
> native-inputs.
>
> The tarballs like 1.4.2.tar.gz are just directory snapshots
> automatically generated by GitHub when you create a new tag. Often 
> the
> project will provide a "real" release tarball, as in this case.

Ah yes, I got a little confused by the different links offered in the 
github “Downloads” section.  They should just remove those “source 
code”  links (made me think that the other link contained 
pre-compiled stuff).

> The built package doesn't retain a reference to openssh. But, I
> recommend not including openssh, even though there is a 'cmd_ssh' 
> field
> in the rsnapshot configuration file. Rsnapshot can work locally 
> without
> SSH, and users may want to use something besides OpenSSH.

Yes, you're right. I thought it would need it for the tests, but it 
happily skips the ssh tests, it seems.

>> +    (synopsis "Incremental backup utility based on rsync")
>
> I'd call it a "Deduplicating snapshot backup utility based on 
> rsync",
> but I admit this is a nit-pick, and you can ignore it :)

I Picked the nit anyway.

> I'd say, "To reduce the disk space required for each backup, 
> rsnapshot
> uses hard links to deduplicate identical files". This way, the 
> reader
> knows how the code uses hard links.

done.

> Can you send an updated patch?

Attached, feel free to add “Co-authored by...“ :-)

Thomas