I'm just back from having spent a week in Helsinki. Despite some minor irritations (the light-switches were always too damn low) it was a lovely trip.
There is a lot to be said for a place, and a culture, where shrugging and grunting counts as communication.
Now I'm back, catching up on things, and mostly plotting and planning how to handle my backups going forward.
Filesystem backups I generally take using backup2l, creating local incremental backup archives then shipping them offsite using rsync. For my personal stuff I have a bunch of space on a number of hosts and I just use rsync to literally copy my ~/Images, ~/Videos, etc..
In the near future I'm going to have access to a backup server which will run rsync, and pretty much nothing else. I want to decide how to archive my content to that - securely.
The biggest issue is that my images (.CR2 + .JPG) will want to be encrypted remotely, but not locally. So I guess if I re-encrypt transient copies and rsync them I'll end up having to send "full" changes each time I rsync. Clearly that will waste bandwidth.
So my alternatives are to use incrementals, as I do elsewhere, then GPG-encrypt the tar files that are produced - simple to do with backup2l - and us rsync. That seems like the best plan, but requires that I have more space available locally since :
- I need the local .tar files.
- I then need to .tar.gz.asc/.tar.gz.gpg files too.
I guess I will ponder. It isn't horrific to require local duplication, but it strikes me as something I'd rather avoid - especially given that we're talking about rsync from a home-broadband which will take weeks at best for the initial copy.